EV Digest 6018
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: LED brakelights
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Battery energy density question
by Tehben Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: What EV would you do with big funds?
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Plexiglas Battery Box
by "Ted C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) OT: was finally working, now Bug
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: New Battery Technology Achieves 100 Miles with Hybrid Electric Vehicles
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Battery energy density question
by Jay Snable <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Electrovair Corrections
by Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Battery energy density question
by Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) A123 Group buy?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Re: Plexiglas Battery Box
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Buss Bars
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Plexiglas Battery Box
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Buss Bars
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Electrovair Corrections
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: #22
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: New Battery Technology Achieves 100 Miles with Hybrid Electric Vehicles
by "Peter Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
19) RE: Battery energy density question
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) RE: lee's emeter companion?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: lee's emeter companion?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Jude. My tail light bulbs are not 1157 they are the wedge bulb.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jude Anthony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mike Phillips wrote:
> > I'm wanting to replace my 3 brake light bulbs as they pull .3 amps
from
> > the 300v pack thru the dc-dc. That's just a plain waste. Then
there are
> > the 2 running light elements as well.
> >
> > The problem is that my S10 uses those in line sockets so the leds
would
> > have to be installed at 90 degrees in order to point rearward.
> >
> I just visited the Ledtronics link --
> http://www.ledtronics.com/markets/auto_index.htm -- in an ealier post
> and found 90 degree 1157 replacement bulbs.
>
> Jude Anthony
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This may sound stupid but when you read that the energy density of a
battery is "65 Wh/L" what does "L" stand for?
Thanks,
-Tehben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks much Ryan for the Baseline Suspension link. This site is awesome and
extremely informative. I have sent an email to NEDRA's webmaster, Chip
Gribben to get it up on our links page under "Racing and EV Tech" Thanks
again!
Roderick Wilde
NEDRA Marketing Director
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: What EV would you do with big funds?
with more then 130 extra battery horsepower for the coming 2007 racing
season, 11's are most certain...
I'd say so! Congrats on that!
Have you seen these recent Auto Meter gauges that claim to be able to
calculate 0-60, 60-0, 1/4 mile times, hp, and g-forces? That would be
cool to have. I could see news reporter types quoting those numbers
in their sensational stories.
http://www.autometer.com/cat_gaugedetail.aspx?ref=search&gid=3293
http://www.autometer.com/cat_gaugedetail.aspx?ref=search&gid=3284
Info:
http://www.autometer.com/cat_dpic.aspx?gid=3284&sid=4
Instructions(8 megs):
http://www.autometer.com/download_instruction/dpic%20inst.pdf
Also, check this out if you haven't already seen it, particularly the
"Instant Center" info:
http://www.baselinesuspensions.com/info/Launching_A_Drag_Car.htm
A123
I wonder how much mark up they currently have on these? If you had a
single cell in your hand, how much in raw materials cost is in one
battery?
How cheap are these cells going to have to be before they are
affordable enough for EV use? Maybe a really, really large group buy
could get the cost down? If 15 or 20 people need a few thousand
batteries each? Then what to do about a BMS? These A123s are very
reminiscent of the Bolder Technologies cells. John, I'm actually
really surprised you don't have A123 sponsorship.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.3/474 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.3/474 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One place that comes to mind is < http://www.tapplastics.com/ > They have
quite a few west coast locations.
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: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: Plexiglas Battery Box
Hardware stores carry some clear acrylic and polycarbonate window
material. Not a great place to shop.
There are plastics shops in every major city, and often in small ones too.
There is a Regal Plastics, Polyplastic, and one other I don't remember the
name of within 10 min of where I live in Austin. They stock all sorts of
stuff in rack after rack. They have a scrap bin that they sell by the
pound, and also they also just fill the dumpster with odd pieces often
too. Typically if you do need prime, custom cut material it's still quite
reasonable.
Lexan (polycarbonate) is stronger than Plexiglass (acrylic) but still
quite breakable. Some people tried to make battle bots out them, they
chip and shatter well enough if struck with a hammer.
Danny
Mike Sandman wrote:
there are many places to get this stuff in quantity--local hardware
stores are usually over priced. here is one to get you started.
http://freckleface.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/plasticmaterial.html
this place will sell sample boxes very cheap--basically cut-offs. these
are great for testing.
regards,
mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bug has been (in legend) as being some insect that fell across the internal
workings of a computer. The guy who taught me to program (after I got out of
computer school) had a different explanation.
The old computer systems were very hot. The one (still at his university)
was cooled using water from a pond. They would "debug" the computer
regularly. The system exchanged its heat to a body of water. Algae, dirt and
bugs could collect on the cooling fins. They'd "debug" the system by
cleaning the heat exchanger. This was the work of early low-level people...
such as student interns and computer programmers... to keep the computer
working and your results accurate.
He said this was the original term, as given to him, before this other term
became standard legend... by people who were around during the early days.
This particular computer, from what I understand, was used to compute
ballistics for military shells. As one of the few computers of its day, it's
as good an explanation as any. Debugging meant cleaning the fins, so the
computer wouldn't go awry due to overheating. (This happened about every
week or two.)
Anyone that would open a computer housing and let an insect into the unit
would not only be fired, but probably racked and quartered. By today's
money, that's gotta be several million bucks of equipment... and it was in a
sealed room, where only technicians in booties and protective suits could
enter. Tubes constantly blew, so failure wasn't a major thing... so I doubt
they'd notice an insect across a lead.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: finally working
> 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
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What kind of con man writes this crap?
["A very immediate and attractive application is the "plug-in"
hybrid-electric car. These cars have been around for years but until now,
the power sources have been very unreliable."]
Sure, I remember plug-in hybrids when I was a wee lad but they never had the
daily range on battery only of 100 to 150 miles per day required by the
average driver ;-)
"["In order for the hybrid design approach to have a significant impact upon
"fuel consumption", the range of the hybrid operating solely on battery
charge must be in the region of typical driving for a large portion of
motorists. That range is probably in the 100 to 150 miles per day, including
some margin for unusual amounts of travel.]"
Give me a break PLEASE and post this on the over unity sites with all the
other crap. If you can't smell this you need to have your BS detector
checked.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "ROBERT GOUDREAU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:00 PM
Subject: New Battery Technology Achieves 100 Miles with Hybrid Electric
Vehicles
Friday, 13 October 2006
*Technology Research Laboratories introduces Battery Technology that
Achieves 100 Miles with Hybrid Electric Vehicles*
Research Triangle Park, NC and Port Orange, Florida -- Technology Research
Laboratories (TRL) is announcing a new long-life battery technology that can
make hybrid electric vehicle traveling a reality. The battery's unique
properties of low cost, long life and safety are all characteristics that
are a necessity of a power source for electric vehicles, or any consumer and
industrial product.
TRL's battery operates on physical chemistry principles different from those
of conventional batteries. It resembles nothing on the market. The battery
utilizes materials that are plentiful, inexpensive and far less polluting
than other battery devices. Fabricated almost entirely of carbon and
plastic, the battery has the ability to withstand severe electrical abuse,
including total discharge or disuse for prolonged time periods.
A very immediate and attractive application is the "plug-in" hybrid-electric
car. These cars have been around for years but until now, the power sources
have been very unreliable. The TRL battery provides a means to achieve
hybrid electric vehicles with a range of 75 or more miles per charge. Tests
from TRL confirm that a typical 4-passenger electric car powered by less
than 1000 pounds of TRL batteries would have a range of between 75 and 100
mile depending upon speed and road conditions.
*History*
From the early 19th century to the present the attempts have continued
toward developing a practical electrically powered road vehicle. The
obstacles have been the same for the past 150 years – a practical source of
motive power, i.e., economical source of electrical energy. An electrically
rechargeable battery is the most desirable solution. Despite its simplicity,
the electric car never became a commercial success because of its limited
range and uncertainty of returning home on a charge.
In order for the hybrid design approach to have a significant impact upon
"fuel consumption", the range of the hybrid operating solely on battery
charge must be in the region of typical driving for a large portion of
motorists. That range is probably in the 100 to 150 miles per day, including
some margin for unusual amounts of travel. With such performance the hybrid
car could be driven on battery power most of the time, and the internal
combustion engine used only for extended trips.
Predominant problems preventing or seriously inhibiting the practical
commercialization of the electric car are:
• Battery life
• Battery cost
• Battery weight
TRL now has a solution that has been long coming.
TRL is seeking to place the technology with organizations that have the
necessary manufacturing and marketing capabilities to bring it to fruition
as useful energy products. The battery also has potential applications for
stand-alone wind or solar power systems and power station load leveling.
For more detailed information and specifications on the technology, please
visit
http://www.AlternativeEnergyStorage.com<http://www.alternativeenergystorage.com/>and
http://www.hybridnrg.com .
*About Technology Research Laboratories*
TRL is an independent R&D company with over 35 years of developing unique
energy systems. Their purpose is to properly place new technology so that it
may be taken to commercialization as products. Prototypes for test and
evaluation are available.
*Media contact:*
Ralph Zito
Technology Research Laboratories, Inc.
Port orange, Florida
Phone: (386) 763-9340
Fax: (386) 763-9341
[EMAIL PROTECTED] This email address is being protected from spam bots, you
need Javascript enabled to view it
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.3/474 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.3/474 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
L is for liter...
Jay
On Oct 13, 2006, at 8:22 PM, Tehben Dean wrote:
This may sound stupid but when you read that the energy density of
a battery is "65 Wh/L" what does "L" stand for?
Thanks,
-Tehben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't mean to disparage John's knowledge or enthusiasm for electric
vehicles and let me say thanks to John (and many others) on this list
who are a wealth of information and experience.
However, I must say that what John considers "an expensive,
disappointing, low performance perpetuation of the EV myth" has
specifications (excluding the price) that I believe would make many
current EV owners (myself included) envious. In addition, I think the
Electrovair should also be recognized in the historical context of when
it was made - not held to the same standards of a contemporary drag
racing vehicle, or even a purpose built vehicle like the EV1.
As far as I'm concerned - 0 to 60 in 16 seconds is plenty fast enough
for my tastes - even if I'm driving one of my ICE cars. In fact I have
serious doubts about the ability of any of my vehicles (electric, gas or
diesel powered) to do 0-60 in 16 seconds. My truck has just a 120V pack
of golf car batteries, but it suits me. Heck, 0-60 in 16 seconds would
be a lot faster than it goes with a Curtis 1221C, but that's all I need!
What impresses me about the Electrovair is that an AC drive
vehicle with solid state components could be constructed when most
consumer electronics were entirely vacuum tube operated. Home built EVs
didn't even have DC powered PWM for what - another 20+ years? If GM
could make a vehicle like the Electrovair 40 years ago, why hasn't the
technology progressed further than it has?
I think quibbling about minor details such as the specifications of a
vehicle that is long gone misses the point. I'm not old enough to
remember the Electrovair, but when I read about it, it sounds an awful
lot like the EV1 - a very advanced design, never mass produced, then
quickly destroyed and suppressed until hardly anyone knows it ever
existed. I don't know what the public reaction to it was back then, but
I doubt it even got as much publicity as the EV1.
John makes a lot of good points about the Electrovair and the EV1, but
as I see it, the Electrovair WAS very similar to the EV1, and the fact
that the state of EV marketing and technology hasn't improved
dramatically in the span of 40 years is just one more piece of evidence
against the apathy, incompetence or even malice of the auto manufacturers.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Oct 13, 2006, at 9:22 PM, Tehben Dean wrote:
This may sound stupid but when you read that the energy density of a
battery is "65 Wh/L" what does "L" stand for?
There are two types of density we use to talk about batteries -
gravimetric and volumetric.
Gravimetric density is a measure of how much energy the battery stores
per unit of weight - pounds, kilograms, etc.
Volumetric density is a measure of how much energy the battery stores
per unit of volume - cubic feet, liters, etc.
You can use these measurements to compare different batteries and
fuels. Of course when you're designing an actual vehicle, there's much
more to consider. An energy source with good energy density might have
other drawbacks - carcinogenic (gasoline), toxic (nicad, lead) operates
only at very high temperatures (sodium sulfur), tends to explode or
catch fire (gas, hydrogen, lithium), operates at an inconvenient
voltage (supercaps), expensive (non-lead batteries), encumbered by
patents (NiMH), etc.
To (finally!) answer your question, the "L" stands for "liter", which
makes this a volumetric energy density. This tells you how large the
battery is. It is also important to know the gravimetric density, so
you can calculate how much the battery will weigh.
There's a nice article in the Wikipedia, along with some useful data.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density>
Compare the energy density of gasoline to the batteries included in the
table to get an idea of why EVs have such poor range compared to
gasoline-powered vehicles.
Hope this helps,
Doug
Thanks,
-Tehben
--
Doug Weathers
Las Cruces, NM, USA
<http://learn-something.blogsite.org/>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Did someone say group buy?
40 or 60 thousand little batteries. Can anyone on this list build a BMS that
would work?
Is there anyone on this lis that will spend more money than what lead acid
batteries cost?
Don
In a message dated 10/13/2006 6:56:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wonder how much mark up they currently have on these? If you had a
single cell in your hand, how much in raw materials cost is in one
battery?
How cheap are these cells going to have to be before they are
affordable enough for EV use? Maybe a really, really large group buy
could get the cost down? If 15 or 20 people need a few thousand
batteries each? Then what to do about a BMS? These A123s are very
reminiscent of the Bolder Technologies cells. John, I'm actually
really surprised you don't have A123 sponsorship.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Curtis Muhlestein wrote:
My friend at work suggested Plexiglas for a battery box. Is Plexiglas
strong enough to be used as a battery box?
No; plexiglass (acrylic plastic) would be a poor choice. It is brittle,
cracks and breaks easily, burns ferociously, and easily deforms even
with modest amounts of heat.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Phil Marino wrote:
About lead-dipping them - my guess is that some sort of flux should be
applied to the copper parts first. I don't know of a source for "resin"
flux in quantity, but I can get a big tube of flux cheap at the BORG in
the plumbing department..
That's probably acid flux, so would it be a bad idea to use it on bus bars?
When I was a yout, I remember hearing "never use acid core solder on
electronics", so, I never have.
Acid flux works great for metalwork, but you have to thoroughly wash off
the excess flux after you're done or it will corrode the metal. This
washing is obviously impractical on electronics; thus the warning not to
use acid flux on electronics.
But for "tinning" these buss bars, an acid-based flux is fine, It would
be trivially easy to wash them when you're finished, and even if you
didn't, the acid won't bother the lead coating. The whole point of the
lead coating, after all, is to render the bussbars impervious to acid!
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Phil Marino wrote:
Plexiglass is not very strong and is very brittle. A much better choice
would be polycarbonate. it's strong, but not very stiff. It would
probably make a pretty heavy ( and expensive) battery box.
The recommended materials for a battery box are usually polypropylene,
polyethylene, or ABS.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 12 Oct 2006 at 19:04, Rush wrote:
> The reason they need to be TIGHT is that if you use the buss bars, then the
> battery posts that you attach them to will have to be SECURE.
When Saft made up battery packs for the Pivco Citibee prototypes, they used
busbars - and they literally >glued< the batteries into the tray. Also,
their STM batteries have terminals mounted in some kind of flexible sealing
material, so that vibration isn't so apt to break the seal and cause leaks.
I would not use rigid busbars on ordinary lead batteries, probably not even
if they were stationary (as in a PV system).
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 13 Oct 2006 at 22:46, Nick wrote:
> I don't know what the public reaction to it was back then, but
> I doubt it even got as much publicity as the EV1.
I seem to recall (and Lee may have a better recollection of this) that GM
was quite forthcoming with the media concerning the Electrovair. It was
written up in at least one or two of the popular mags along the lines of
Popular Science and Mechanix Illustrated (those may not have been the exact
ones, but publications of that ilk).
I also don't recall that articles carried the insistently negative cant that
you often see today when EVs are discussed. Readers were interested in EVs
and other kinds of alternative transportation systems, and authors and
editors seemed to be serving the readers' desires at least as much as their
advertisers'. Today one gets the impression that this relationship has
flipped.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 12 Oct 2006 at 19:08, dm3 wrote:
> Its much better building them than
> talking about tail gates or tail lights.
Discussion of how to make EVs more efficient is hardly a waste of time. But
I agree, all talk and no action doesn't get EVs on the road.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Indeed pure BS. 1000 lbs of batteries for 75-100 mile range would put
this technology somewhere between lead acid and NiMH. Hardly the
solution to our battery problems.
On 10/13/06, Roderick Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What kind of con man writes this crap?
["A very immediate and attractive application is the "plug-in"
hybrid-electric car. These cars have been around for years but until now,
the power sources have been very unreliable."]
Sure, I remember plug-in hybrids when I was a wee lad but they never had the
daily range on battery only of 100 to 150 miles per day required by the
average driver ;-)
"["In order for the hybrid design approach to have a significant impact upon
"fuel consumption", the range of the hybrid operating solely on battery
charge must be in the region of typical driving for a large portion of
motorists. That range is probably in the 100 to 150 miles per day, including
some margin for unusual amounts of travel.]"
Give me a break PLEASE and post this on the over unity sites with all the
other crap. If you can't smell this you need to have your BS detector
checked.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "ROBERT GOUDREAU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:00 PM
Subject: New Battery Technology Achieves 100 Miles with Hybrid Electric
Vehicles
Friday, 13 October 2006
*Technology Research Laboratories introduces Battery Technology that
Achieves 100 Miles with Hybrid Electric Vehicles*
Research Triangle Park, NC and Port Orange, Florida -- Technology Research
Laboratories (TRL) is announcing a new long-life battery technology that can
make hybrid electric vehicle traveling a reality. The battery's unique
properties of low cost, long life and safety are all characteristics that
are a necessity of a power source for electric vehicles, or any consumer and
industrial product.
TRL's battery operates on physical chemistry principles different from those
of conventional batteries. It resembles nothing on the market. The battery
utilizes materials that are plentiful, inexpensive and far less polluting
than other battery devices. Fabricated almost entirely of carbon and
plastic, the battery has the ability to withstand severe electrical abuse,
including total discharge or disuse for prolonged time periods.
A very immediate and attractive application is the "plug-in" hybrid-electric
car. These cars have been around for years but until now, the power sources
have been very unreliable. The TRL battery provides a means to achieve
hybrid electric vehicles with a range of 75 or more miles per charge. Tests
from TRL confirm that a typical 4-passenger electric car powered by less
than 1000 pounds of TRL batteries would have a range of between 75 and 100
mile depending upon speed and road conditions.
*History*
>From the early 19th century to the present the attempts have continued
toward developing a practical electrically powered road vehicle. The
obstacles have been the same for the past 150 years – a practical source of
motive power, i.e., economical source of electrical energy. An electrically
rechargeable battery is the most desirable solution. Despite its simplicity,
the electric car never became a commercial success because of its limited
range and uncertainty of returning home on a charge.
In order for the hybrid design approach to have a significant impact upon
"fuel consumption", the range of the hybrid operating solely on battery
charge must be in the region of typical driving for a large portion of
motorists. That range is probably in the 100 to 150 miles per day, including
some margin for unusual amounts of travel. With such performance the hybrid
car could be driven on battery power most of the time, and the internal
combustion engine used only for extended trips.
Predominant problems preventing or seriously inhibiting the practical
commercialization of the electric car are:
• Battery life
• Battery cost
• Battery weight
TRL now has a solution that has been long coming.
TRL is seeking to place the technology with organizations that have the
necessary manufacturing and marketing capabilities to bring it to fruition
as useful energy products. The battery also has potential applications for
stand-alone wind or solar power systems and power station load leveling.
For more detailed information and specifications on the technology, please
visit
http://www.AlternativeEnergyStorage.com<http://www.alternativeenergystorage.com/>and
http://www.hybridnrg.com .
*About Technology Research Laboratories*
TRL is an independent R&D company with over 35 years of developing unique
energy systems. Their purpose is to properly place new technology so that it
may be taken to commercialization as products. Prototypes for test and
evaluation are available.
*Media contact:*
Ralph Zito
Technology Research Laboratories, Inc.
Port orange, Florida
Phone: (386) 763-9340
Fax: (386) 763-9341
[EMAIL PROTECTED] This email address is being protected from spam bots, you
need Javascript enabled to view it
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.3/474 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.3/474 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Victor
Factory EVs do not have bad batteries only misunderstood ones. Ha
What if all the batteries were good the system is only set up to protect
them? Do you really want to take your pack down and keep going?
Of the factory Vehicles I have owned Ranger, S-10, Solectria all of them did
not just die they go into reduced performance. Then yes if you keep going at
some point they will shut down. It is not done without good reason. I have
the Ford and GM technical tools that show you what the vehicle is seeing. Live
readings on all the batteries including their actual Ah capacity.
In one instance I had three bad batteries of 26 in the S-10. They were easy
to find by running down the pack and doing a performance check by driving up
a long up hill street. I could see these batteries drop to as low as 8 volts
under load while the others were still over 11 volts. I did this for some time
until it finally when into reduced performance. With three batteries as low
as 8 volts under load how much further is one really going to go. These were
not new batteries but a well used pack.
The Factory vehicles do not just quit with a single bad battery. They will
inform you have a problem and if you do not address it and if others fail then
the factory system will shut down. Ford allows three before it goes into
reduced performance.
The Solectria would go into reduced performance only on the total pack
voltage. If you went down a hill and had some regen it would bump up the
voltage
enough to go back to normal. The Solectria only took the whole pack voltage
not each battery. It would not know if one battery was 8 volts.
Being able to see each battery voltage on a NiMH and stop a low battery from
cell reversal is a good thing when your looking at the cost of NiMH
batteries. This same system is used in the NiMH truck.
How would you build an electric vehicle if you owned it and were going to
lease it to the public? I know how some people drive rental cars and if they do
not have to pay the bill they would run a pack to the ground.
With the s-10 and the Tech 2 you can see everything live and also all the
history. It is very detailed from the motors highest temp and when to how much
kW you have used to charge the pack. To be honest it does more than I have
learned since I do not know how to do the graphs.
Sorry I missed the meeting the other night. I need to talk to you.
Don
In a message dated 10/12/2006 10:50:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don, you should know more how their SOC works. You think it's very
accurate because the car dies when SOC meter it predicts it will?
No. The SOC meter counts back conservative capacity number based on
the worst battery and when meter rolls to zero *it* kills the controller
making
illusion of spot on accurate estimation. In reality amount of Ah left
in the battery could move you further, they just disallowed this.
That way you're never stranded. The price for it - unused capacity,
sometimes less sometimes more of it (still unpredictable!) depending
on how you were driving.
If you'd reverse engineer Ranger's charger software, you'd clearly
see this.
Victor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 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.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Liter, equalling the contents of a cube decimeter
(one thousandst of a cubic meter) as dm = 1/10 m
It is the metric volume measurement.
One gallon is approx 3.8 liters (US gal, wet measure)
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 Tehben Dean
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Battery energy density question
This may sound stupid but when you read that the energy density of a
battery is "65 Wh/L" what does "L" stand for?
Thanks,
-Tehben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Cory Cross wrote:
> In my gas car, it doesn't matter that my %full
> has little relation to how far I can go, because it's
> always going to be many times the distance to the gas
> station.
Only if you don't drive outside of urban areas and/or always start your
trips with a full tank ;^> It is fairly common where I drive to see
signs like 'check your fuel; XX (or XXX) km to the next station'. This
is exactly like the EV situation where you do need to have some idea of
how far you can travel on the amount fuel you are told is remaining
since there isn't a place to fuel up on every other corner.
The point is well made, however, that if your EV has sufficiently
greater range than you normally ever require, it doesn't really matter
if you have an accurate fuel guage (or any fuel guage at all). I think
this is largely the case for Victor, but I think it is a difficult
argument to make when the cost of 2-3x (or more) the battery capacity
you actually need is so much more than the cost of even the most
feature-laden fuel guage.
> The RangerEV "tank" gauge is acceptable because it has
> a pretty good range. I think it could be made better by
> having a second needle gauge with units from 0-80miles
> -- representing that traffic like the last time frame
> would result in a "full tank" going that many miles.
How exactly would this differ, or be superior to the distance remaining
to empty indicator that we are told already complements the Ranger EV's
fuel guage?
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> I'm not against this feature and it will be implemented
> in EVision. What I see though is the situation when
> relying on it will mislead you worse than if you have
> no estimator at all.
Perhaps (like I was) you are considering only the jumping guage scenario
(i.e. the gauge is periodically refreshed to display the fraction of
energy available at the present rate of consumption based on Peukert)?
I still think that if one has only the original vehicle's fuel guage as
an indicator, then this approach results in the most useful/informative
display. My reasoning is that if one decreases their rate of
consumption and sees the fuel guage move upwards they have immediate
feedback indicating to them that there is more energy available to them
now than at their prior rate of consumption. If the guage does not jump
upwards, then they have no feedback on what their driving adjustment has
made on how far they might be able to travel until they have travelled
sufficiently long at the new speed to get a feel for how fast or slow
the guage is dropping compared to before the change.
> > 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.
>
> That is assuming that second part of the trip will have the
> same driving pattern that the first one. Exactly the root
> of the problem. People want accurate distance estimator no
> matter how they are going to drive next half hour. No
> software can predict it, so *this* is what I mean by useless
> in prediction. IF you drive steady, yes, I see the benefits.
> But this is big "if".
In neither case described above does the EV guage predict how many miles
of range remain, just as the fuel guage in my ICE doesn't. Just as the
EV's guage cannot predict my future driving pattern/route to accurately
predict range remaining, my ICE's fuel guage cannot either.
Perhaps I haven't been clear, but when I read and refer to an EV fuel
guage, I mean exactly that: a fuel guage. Even more specifically, since
I'm not an EV OEM, I am referring to providing a useful indication of
the energy remaining available in the battery using the donor vehicle's
original fuel guage. This guage is not calibrated/marked in miles or
gallons or kWh or Ah; it simply indicates Empty to Full, typically with
markings of no greater resolution than 1/8 increments (12.5% steps).
I don't really think there is any question that including Peukert
compensation will improve the usefulness of such a guage; I think the
bigger question is how the Peukert compensation should most usefully
modify the behaviour of such a guage:
- update the fuel guage at regular intervals to display the fraction of
its capacity remaining at the average rate of consumption obeserved
since the last update. This results in a guage that can jump upwards
when the rate of consumption drops, providing immediate feedback to the
driver of the effect that their driving change has had. When the user
drives steadily, the guage decreases steadily at a rate dependant on
their present rate of consumption, just like a normal fuel guage. When
the rate of consumption changes, the guage jumps up or down to a new
level reflecting the fact that the size of the EV's tank varies with the
rate of consumption.
- use the fuel guage to indicate the fraction of the Peukert capacity
remaining, and apply Peukert correction to the rate of consumption so
that the rate at which the guage falls is more accurately representative
of the effect that higher rates of consumption have on the remaining
range (the guage falls faster because the rate of consumption is higher,
and it falls at an even more accelerated rate because at the higher rate
of consumption each Ah consumed counts as a greater fraction of the
capacity). This results in a guage that never jumps upwards (unless
energy really is returned to the pack), but whose rate of fall more
accurately reflects the effect of the present rate of consumption on the
available capacity than would the simple linear decrease of an
uncorrected Ah or Wh meter.
> If you don't know your range, you're careful and may
> not take a risk.
If you don't know your range, you have additional stress associated with
driving an EV and less incentive to do so. Fear of being stranded is
probably the biggest obstacle impeding wider EV acceptance. It is
self-defeating to argue that there is some benefit to *not* providing
the most accurate and/or informative fuel guage possible.
> IF you have gadget reporting you have 5 miles, you'd
> think you have indeed 5 miles no matter how fast.
This is no different than an ICE's fuel guage.
You do raise a good point however, which is that there is a danger
inherent to digital displays of any sort: as soon as you display a
numeric value instead of just pointing in the general vicinity of a
marking on an analog guage, people tend to assume without question that
it is *exactly* the indicated value.
I think that this is one aspect how having a fuel guage that jumps
around to a new level when the rate of consumption varies is useful: it
provides immediate feedback to the driver that its indication *does*
depend on the present speed/etc. Assuming that the guage is analog, it
also avoids the pitfall of having the driver take its indication as
being precise; people inherently interpret analog guages as indicating
"about" this or that, and so will automatically allow for a little
'slop' or innaccuracy.
> Give little more credit to people's intelligence - they will learn
> their gauge quickly. Very quickly after getting stuck on the
> freeway :-)
It isnt just their guage, it is the fact that the rate at which their
vehicle consumes energy will vary with driving conditions, route,
vehicle condition (cold, low tire(s), etc.), and unless the driver is
surrounded by a confusing array of guages they will have no way of
knowing what their rate of consumption is at any particular time. I
don't consider it reasonable that an EVer must get stuck at least once
on each route they try in order to 'learn their guage', especially if
there is something fairly straightforward that can be done to make the
guage more useful and so avoid at least some of these situations.
> If BRUSA counter would cost half of e-meter's you wouldn't be
> asking this question. So, it's matter of money, not features.
I'm sure cost is a factor, but I certainly don't recall the gap in price
between the BRUSA counter and an E-Meter (+prescaler & Dc/DC, etc) being
particularly significant.
> I *want* you to tell me what features to include, because you're
> the ultimate user. I polled the list a while ago about this, and
> no one objected having Peukert correction, so it will be there.
> I was explaining position of BRUSA why they didn't include it, and
> I can see very clearly valid reasons for not including it.
Well, the biggest reason (and quite a sensible one) I see for BRUSA not
including the feature is that their guage doesn't (as far as I recall)
purport to be anything more or less than an Ah counter. I think it
perfectly reasonable *not* to include Peukert correction in an Ah or Wh
tracking device, but at the same time, I suspect that BRUSA developed
their meter in response to the needs of some specific customer or
application, and those needs simply didn't include Peukert correction.
OK, my opinion of features I'd like to see (I know at least some of
these are already planned/included, but I'll list them anyway):
- a meter 'brain'/black-box that can drive the original vehicle's analog
fuel guage (i.e. does not require some custom/digital display, no matter
how well thought out, although such a display may be optional)
- includes optional Peukert correction
- allows selection of either of the two fuel guage behaviours
(approaches to Peukert correction) described above
- supports logging of all raw and processed data (volts, amps, kWh, Ah,
etc.)
- may be powered directly from the battery being monitored, or from some
other source without defeating any isolation between the two.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
