EV Digest 6054
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: After Market Electric power steering box
by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dana Havranek)
2) Re: Formula
by "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Inexpensive DC Motors with Keyed Shafts
by "Bruce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: GoWheel.com & EV-Battery.com
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Bradley GTE Project
by Steve Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Spiked comments on WKTEC at IMDB.COM
by "David O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) re:1980 VW Rabbit project for sale
by "steve clunn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Faults of the EV1
by doug korthof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Spiked comments on WKTEC at IMDB.COM
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10) Re: Bradley GTE Project
by "Don" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Controller co-op, Re: EV controllers? the 4th option...
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Inexpensive DC Motors with Keyed Shafts
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Yazaki to Avcon connector swap-out on EVI ICS-200?
by "Charles Whalen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Bradley GTE Project
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Who owns Yahoo Group - electric_vehicles_for_sale?
by "David O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Faults of the EV1
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hi David and all:
Interesting post - your comments about the ICE computer system interface and EV
conversions.
I recently completed a conversion and had wondering about how the different
systems would interact with all the sensors cut.
But, true to my nature, I just plowed through it, snipped all the sensors,
kinda keep track of what I snipped, then forgot, all the while aware that there
was some grand plan for all this data. In the back of my mind, I wondered if
when I finally turned the key, the dash would light up and just say,"Not a
chance! You cut my all my stuff out. Your done. Now you can just re-wire the
whole car!."
Well, to my surprise, it didn't.
There's interactive stuff going on, like when I hooked up the tach and all
sorts of idiot lights and buzzers started going off, but the major systems seem
to be running in parallel. Must be some car computer rule or programming
practice or something. The alarm works, all the subsystems that I need to work
still work. There is just a buzzer I am going to smash if I find it.
But this is just one conversion (recent model VW) and I wonder if other makes
and models will pose more of a problem.
I wonder, in general, if most conversions do O.K. with all the sensors snipped
out or if some have had more problems then others.
Great post. It was in the back of my mind for a year.
Dana
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 21 Oct 2006 at 7:46, Michael Perry wrote:
>
> > electric power steering ... You might salvage a unit from ...
>
> I could be wrong, but I'd guess 'twill be quite a challenge, since many or
> most are apt to be under the control of the vehicle's onboard computer.
> You'd have to design a new controller for the PS hardware, or something to
> fool the existing controller into thinking it was hearing from the body
> computer.
>
> More and more, cars are becoming dependent on their computers. If one thing
> is wrong - for example, the engine sensors don't report the expected
> behavior - the car may shut down other crucial systems or behave strangely.
>
>
> I have some real concerns for the future of EV conversion. Eventually we
> may be ripping out all the electronics and wiring from scratch, effectively
> stripping the car to its shell. This will not only mean enormously more
> labor, it will make it exceedingly difficult to retain such safety features
> as ABS and air bags.
>
> It will also make backyard conversions nearly impossible for those with
> minimal expertise. No more $1500 forklift motor or aircraft generator
> conversions, no more dropping in a motor and piling in the batteries and
> driving. We'll become dependent on those who can figure out how to crack
> the computers, and will sell us the black boxes. I can even see such things
> being made illegal at the behest of the automakers.
>
> I have nothing against 1996 Honda Civics, but I'd hate to have that as my
> only choice for a glider in 2015 because all the newer Hondas were too
> computerized.
>
>
> 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 ---
Don wrote -
> Still learning & planning
>
> Given a 96 Volt Flooded Lead Acid battery pack using 16 six volt batteries,
> what is the formula used to determine wattage & amperage? I know...basic
> ohms law...Please explain. Thanks.
In a series string the Volts are additive, in a parallel string the amps are
additive. So in series, if your batteries are 125 amps, you'll have
6v+6v+6v+6v+6v+6v+6v+6v+6v+etc = 96 volts at 125 amps.
When you put them in parallel it would be
125a+125a+125a+125a+125a+125a+125a+etc = 2000amps at 6 v.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It seems like most surplus / inexpensive motors have splined shafts but there
must exist some that don't.
What DC motors are there that might be suitable for a large motorcycle or small
car that cost less than say $400 and have a non splined shaft with a keyway?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
... All of which brings me back to the question I started with: Why are we
making all of this extraordinary effort, jumping through hoops, with what
would appear to me to be over-engineering a solution to a problem that will
be rendered moot and easily solved by A123 itself when it comes out with
large-format cells next quarter? Wouldn't the path of least resistance,
both literally and figuratively, be to just wait until next quarter for the
large-format cells?
You seem to have an extra ordinary confidence that A123 is going to
delivery a cost-effective product of which I see no official news.
Where is their press release, are you violating a non-disclosure
agreement?
I have no doubt better batteries for EVs are coming, but I wouldn't be
waiting sitting on my hands. This is why I don't think cycle life at
this point is a critical feature, in 3 years new batteries will be out
to replace your old ones. But in 3-5 years the car companies will be
building better EV/PHEVs out, so why build your own now?
Jack
Thanks for any thoughts/insight on this.
Charles Whalen
On Friday, October 20, 2006 10:28 AM, Jukka Jarvinen wrote:
In the tests I've done I found that parallering the cells you actually
force the cells to same voltage. At least it's trying it's best with
rotational currents (dunno the real term in English) to get them in
"balance".
But as it's known Lithium cells rarely can have SOC determination with
voltage. cells will maintain the voltage based balance and the weakest
(less capacity one but not necessary the highest impedance) paralled cell
will fail first. It may even short. With welded poles it's married to 7
others. Worst case is that 7 times best current at the present voltage
level will be transformed to heat in the shorted cell. It may not short
completely but it will draw paralled cells to near 0 V.
Now... If that would have been Cobolt cell.. thermal runaway @ 180
Celsius, Manganese usually over 200 Celsius and Ferrites well over 300
Celsius. I think A123 and Valence has about the same limit. Can't say.
They have not been so interested to sell me any cells.. Wonder why...
So question is that can the paralled cells contribute enough power to
heat
shorted cell enough. If your answer is yes.. problems ahead. If No... You
should be safe but frequent cell swapping should be scheduled for sunday
afternoons.
The single cell solution up to 10 000 ah from TS has same problem.
That is
if you paraller the cells. But as single cell inside one case with same
electrolyte compartment.. It's another story. Such problem does not
exist.
Careful management of cells even in this 8 paralled cell design is best
way to go. you can get away with most problems by sorting the cells by
impedance and capacity.. Whatta F#€ .. AM I helping possible rivals
here..
damn I must be stupid :)
-Jukka
p.s- cause first!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] kirjoitti:
Our feelings are that if a single cell goes bad, we
will refurb the whole pack, rotating remainder cells
of any block into our own toys, testing, destruction,
etc. If too many occurances of failures, we revise
the BMS to be more comprehensive. We're already
planning for more BMS features. It's only a matter of
time, design, money, real world results, and history. We will move
forward, hopefully staying ahead of the
needs and wants of our customers. We have a new plan
for easier cell replacement too that we are testing. We'll see.
Jay
--- Charles Whalen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jukka,
Could you please elaborate on this and explain why
you feel this is the
case?
Is it -- (if I understand Jay's description
correctly) -- because their BMS
apparently only goes to the block level (each block
being 8 cells in
parallel) but not to the individual cell level
within blocks, such that
there is apparently no way to bypass charging
current around individual
cells (that have already reached their top-of-charge
voltage before others
in the block) but rather only around an entire
8-cell-in-parallel block en
masse, and thus would seem to be making an
assumption and leap of faith that
all 8 cells in each block will track absolutely
dead-even with no variation
in voltage over the supposedly 15-year calendar life
claimed for these
cells?
I too was wondering about this, so I'm glad you
raised the question.
Another question in my mind is due to the fact (as I
understand it from
Jay's description) that the 8 cells in parallel in
each block are all
(high-current) tab-welded together, it would appear
that when the weakest
cell in the block utimately degrades to the point of
needing replacement,
(which, again, would seem to be made more likely at
some point, or hastened,
by the lack of BMS control circuitry to the
individual cell level), it will
therefore require replacing, at minimum, the entire
8-cell block (since
they're all tab-welded together) rather than merely
the one single errant
cell.
Any thoughts on that from either Jukka, Jay, or Bill
Dube?
Thanks,
Charles Whalen
On Thursday, October 19, 2006 3:39 PM, Jukka
Jarvinen wrote:
Sounds quite solid for me. you can get safe pack
by this way. But I'm
afraid after certain point and much before
intented a cell replacements
will be reality and frequent. Straining the
"weakest link" in every cycle
will bring it down and fast.
-Jukka
[EMAIL PROTECTED] kirjoitti:
Mark and all,
EV-Battery.com responding per question below:
--- Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Can you give us some more details about these
packs?
We will post results and photos at
www.EV-Battery.com
as we receive and analyze results, probably
updating
the websites about every five days.
What does the BMS do?
(From simple V monitoring to fully temp
compensated
V and I monitoring with over-charge regulation
and over-discharge
protection...)
Our first batteries are the 12 volt gasser
batteries
that require different BMS from stacked EV packs.
The
bigger switch-out packs (79.2V) will have BMS
monitors
that monitor voltage on each stack of eight
paralleled
cells. If this stack voltage gets too high, then
it
places a 3.3 ohm resistor across the stack,
discharging the excess energy.
Can the BMS communicate with an external (to the
batt) device?
(Like a charger, fuel gauge, or logging
computer)
Three different sets of alarms are combined into
�slow-down� or �stop� alarm signals.
First, if
the
voltage of a stack climbs dangerously high, an
alarm
is indicated which should be used to throttle the
charger down to about one amp. A second alarm is
sent
if the stack voltage falls dangerously low,
indicating
the stack is out of charge and the load should be
reduced or stopped. A third alarm source is the
three
temperature sensing thermistors in each module.
Thresholds can be set for
each of the BMS module�s
three thermistors. If any temperatures get above
their individual threshold, the alarm will again
be
signaled. All these alarms are indicated by
turning
on an opto-isolator on the BMS module. Because
they're optoisolated, all the BMS modules in a
pack
can
have their alarm signals wire-ORed in parallel to
create one pack alarm signal.
Do you have photos of a completed pack?
(Lots of 3D mock-ups in your photo gallery)
There are already some photos of our first gasser
(12
volt motorcycle batteries and 12 volt car batts)
already there. Keep in mind that these are
intended
to be gasser replacement batteries targeted to
the
custom car and motorcycle show vehicles. Users
are
trying to stay away from acid damage to their
expensive paint jobs and vehicles that sit for
months
(sometimes years) without driving. Many vehicles
are
primarily artistic and concept vehicles. Many of
them
would like to replace a 45 pound bulky battery
with a
1 pound motorcycle battery or a 5 pound auto
battery
that can hide safely anywhere in any position.
The
motorcycle builders are talking about putting
batteries inside their frames like a flashlight.
The
car guys are talking about a recessed floorboard
mount
with water cooler style lid. They are interested
because there is no bulging, venting, toxic
fumes,
explosive, or fire dangers.
We also realize that gasser batteries are not the
focus of the EV List. So now, we have
commitments to
supply a few race cars (including Le Mans), and
other
traditional gassers with these first batteries.
After
gasser success, we will sell them to people that
use
them in electric vehicles, BUT we are going to be
very
careful that we only supply educated builders
with
logical applications within reasonable
specifications.
We are not ready to promote mainstream EVers to
use
our batteries (as series or parallel packs) until
we
are sure of performance and safety. We will not
make
the switch-out battery pack & case available to
the
general public until it is ready. We only have
so
much manufacturing ability and will restrain
ourselves
from claims of a universal solution.
How are the individual cells interconnected?
=== message truncated ===
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
First, you really need to make a list of your specifications, with an
understanding of your actual environment and road conditions.
Top speed needed: Lets say 80 MPH
Acceleration: lets say 0-40 MPH in 8 sec, 0-60 MPH in 12 sec
Range: worst case stop and go driving between 0 and 45 MPH = 60 miles
Then, you can start thinking about what batt technology and other components
you want. You could spend a lot of $ on something and get an end result you
weren't really interested in.
The Bradley has room for 16 batts. You could just go with 16 AGM 12 V batts
of similar footprint to the current golf cart batteries = 192 V. Zilla 1k HV
controller, PFC charger, ... and you would have a very nice very driveable
vehicle. Going to NiMH is a whole leap beyond that - and a substantial amount
of $. Is it really worth it, based on your requirements? I'm not saying the
above will do that acceleration and range in the Bradley, but it should be
somewhere close to that.
Steve
Don <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If I had unlimited $ today, what would be the cost and what would be involved
with modifying my original 96 V DC configuration Bradley GTE with GE EV1 SCR
controller/Lester Charger as Bradley provided to NiMH batteries?
Advantages/disadvantages of considering this approach?
Don Davidson
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One question about a comment I read:
"I would have thought that Jay Leno would have commented in this film being
a car buff. [...] The director of this film should have at least thought to
ask Jay to speak a cameo or something. Shame on his part!"
So is this true or no? I think its a good question. I am hoping to hear that
Mr. Leno was asked to contribute, but declined for whatever reason.
Dave O.
On 10/21/06, Peter Gabrielsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The deed has been done!
I must say that the majority of the comments were very positive and
well informed. Though there were a several at the top of the list that
obviously has been drinking too much GM coolaid.
On 10/21/06, Dave Muse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alright, I tried to just ignore this - but it's bugging me. I don't know
> how many people here have ever been to IMDB.COM , it's the Internet
> Movie Database, a popular movie site where users rate movies and comment
> on them.
>
> The day before 'Who Killed the Electric Car' premiered, a group of
> people (don't ask me where they came from, I could only speculate)
> showed up en masse to give the movie a very low rating (they all rated
> it a "2" out of 10.) No big deal, because when the real viewers showed
> up, the rating went up to about 7 1/2 over the following few weeks.
>
> Now, however, that a DVD release is planned, this same group of
> troublemakers apparently came back and voted all the negative (and
> misleading) movie comments to the top of the board, where people
> browsing the movies will easily see them..
>
> So what I'm asking here is for as many people as possible to visit
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/ , join IMDB (free), and vote
> up/down the good/bad comments. Even a dozen votes or so would likely
> turn the tide. Vote on the movie, too, as positive comments and votes
> can only help with sales of the DVD.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Lawrence ,,, I got no 2 in when my wife's car engine blow , she was happy
with another car and " the only thing to do with her old car was to convert
it . No 3 was her sons car when Its engine blow , after no 3 I didn't have
to much trouble sneaking them in . Now I'm off in the woods on 5 acres with
2 Russian pu's
3 hyndias
1 Porsche 924
1 Porsche 912 ( converting now )
2 Mitsubishis pu
1 ford ranger pu
1 Honda prelude ( with 4 wheel steering )
1 mg
1 trumphim spit fire
1 juguular sedan
1 Volvo
1 MR2
1 toyto torcell
1 dune buggy
1 Saturn ( converting now )
1 Mazda pu ( my work truck , )
In some ways I guess I own my good luck in scoring the new work shop to her
, after all for years she "Wished I had some other place to do my electric
car thing .
Steve clunn
Lawrence,
My deepest sympathy, try to explain to your wife that 2 is the minimum
you should have on the road and #2 is mandatory if #1 breaks down! I
found that after #3 they (wives) stop paying attention, especially if you
buy/sell parts to pay for the hobby - (re-investing is the argument). I
have 5 and do not plan to sell any, as a matter of fact I am thinking of a
nascar style frame with a funny car body for #6, but first I have to get
#5 running.
My wife didnt mid after she would get lots of questions when she used it
to run errands, many would ask how she got one and they couldn't. Oh yea,
isn't #2 hers or maybe #3?
dont give up
Jimmy
I hope to add an article about my Solectria E10 to my website soon.
https://dm3electrics.com/
> From: "Lawrence Rhodes" ,
Subject: 1980 VW Rabbit project for sale.
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:27:49 -0700
I've craigs listed my Rabbit.
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/car/223529458.html The wife has put her
foot
down. Only one electric car. 80% complete VW Rabbit. Rear battery box
in.
Motor in. Needs: Motor mount, controller, DC/DC, charger & batteries.
Contact Lawrence Rhodes 415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>"From: Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Subject: Who did kill the
>electric car?
>"The EV1 was...an extremely complex car, hand-built, with a million
>refinements and new bits of
>technology. It looked sleek, but at what cost...everyone paid attention to the
>EV1; and by doing so they
>missed the RAV4, the minivan, the S10's..."
Problems with the EV1:
1. It was a purpose-built frame, EXPENSIVE.
2. Built for lead-acid batteries, with minimal wind-resistence and the most
batteries in an enclosed "T" tunnel to see what can be done to make an
efficient car (took off from sunraycer), EXPERIMENTAL.
3. CONTRARILY, Publicized with NiMH batteries, which don't do well in an
enclosed small tunnel due to heat buildup during charging.
4. General POOR GM WORKMANSHIP, and besides, the 1997 was done by engineers,
without much help from car-guys: swayed on acceleration, bad tension on
windshield (blew out at 50K miles like clockwork), bad seals on windshield
(leaked in rain), rushed design on "magnecharger" input port (wrong gauge
wiring, led to one fire), the inductive charger itself (originally designed to
save 70 lbs. by putting the charger off the car, to save weight, not needed
with NiMH), failure-prone input-port cooling fan (use garden hose to cool
charge-port when it failed), the door design and wiring were non-car-standard,
an experimenters' playground but not a Manufacturing Engineer's cup of tea. Or
coffee, FTM. Lots of other little issues that even EV1 afficionados will cop
to.
The design flitted back and forth between ideas of what the car was to be used
for, and different technologies to get there. For example, Smith drove it into
the 1990 auto show under the impression that it would have NiMH batteries,
which it was not designed for. GM, loathe to do any work on it, reluctantly
released it with inferior, failure-prone Delco batteries in 1997 at an
outrageous $599/month "boomerang" lease. The NiMH version required a cooling
system, which GM over-engineered, and only under pressure released 260 of the
NiMH 1999 version in Dec., 1999, after it sat on the tarmac for over 18 months.
The remaining (about 185) were dribbled out over the next few months to select
recipients, while leaving (reputedly) 20 to zoom around the GM test site in
Michigan, where they are still hidden, used for bigwigs and buttheads.
GM's design, management and engineering battles whip-sawed the EV1 back and
forth, reworking, changing and re-designing, with new ideas and weird ideas
piled on engineering experiments such as inductive charging, bringing the total
costs charged to the project (including management hot-shots, galas, and
general corporate mis-management) to an alleged $1B. This outrageous number
has been quoted again and again by GM apologists such as Dave Barthmuss, with
little explanation of the 15-year career of items charged to it, and what
value-added for each charge. At this costing, each EV1 would come in at (more
than) an outrageous $800,000 each. But anyone who has worked in aerospace
engineering knows that a matrix of alleged costs, like spiderwebs, can be spun
across any door.
In 1996, the Japanese took a value-engineering look at it and went with NiMH
batteries, which they improved markedly, finally getting over 100 amp-hours by
2003, but mainly:
1- Used existing frames as "gliders" (Honda CRX, I think, RAV4, etc.) LOWER
COST.
2- Putting the NiMH batteries in a pan under the EV, so that cooling would be
easier BETTER ENGINEERING.
3- Constantly improved Battery and Thermal Managment Systems.
4- High-quality Japanese construction, with good weights-and-balance analysis
of battery positioning.
5- Simpler PM 3-ph brushless motor-controller, much LOWER COST, minimal
performance degradation.
This resulted in a dramatic lowering of the cost for the Japanese versions of
ZEV cars.
Honda's per-car costing was (confidentially related to me) $254,000 per car for
330 EV-Plus cars, or less than $100M for the entire program. Assuming Toyota's
design and startup costs were similar or less for the 500 EV-specific RAV4-EV
parts, that would make the entire Toyota "production" run of an estimated 2000
RAV4-EV (using the 1996-1999 RAV4 body) less than $200M. Thus, at most
$100,000 per RAV4-EV, and probably MUCH less.
This dramatic cost, quality and design difference illustrates the inferiority
of GM engineering and design work, IMO, and also shows, in miniature, why GM
and Ford are self-imploding.
GOOD POINT that everyone seems to ignore or just plain misses the excellent,
work-horse quality of the RAV4-EV, which is not just well designed from an
ergonomic standpoint but also has internal sophistication from the battery to
the PM motor. These RAV4-EV are STILL RUNNING, with virtually NO REPAIRS or
maintenance, faultlessly using the Toyota-Panasonic EV-95 NiMH battery which
stopped production in late 2002 or early 2003. The S-10E and USE S-10 are
still running, too, although they have inferior batteries and reported
battery-replacement problems.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Consider the fact the cost of commercials is where funding comes from. It is
no surprise they would not bite the hands that feed them. What do they gain
from promoting a film like WKTEC and what do they have to lose?
Don
In a message dated 10/22/2006 9:41:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One question about a comment I read:
"I would have thought that Jay Leno would have commented in this film being
a car buff. [...] The director of this film should have at least thought to
ask Jay to speak a cameo or something. Shame on his part!"
So is this true or no? I think its a good question. I am hoping to hear that
Mr. Leno was asked to contribute, but declined for whatever reason.
Dave O.
On 10/21/06, Peter Gabrielsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The deed has been done!
> I must say that the majority of the comments were very positive and
> well informed. Though there were a several at the top of the list that
> obviously has been drinking too much GM coolaid.
>
>
>
> On 10/21/06, Dave Muse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Alright, I tried to just ignore this - but it's bugging me. I don't know
> > how many people here have ever been to IMDB.COM , it's the Internet
> > Movie Database, a popular movie site where users rate movies and comment
> > on them.
> >
> > The day before 'Who Killed the Electric Car' premiered, a group of
> > people (don't ask me where they came from, I could only speculate)
> > showed up en masse to give the movie a very low rating (they all rated
> > it a "2" out of 10.) No big deal, because when the real viewers showed
> > up, the rating went up to about 7 1/2 over the following few weeks.
> >
> > Now, however, that a DVD release is planned, this same group of
> > troublemakers apparently came back and voted all the negative (and
> > misleading) movie comments to the top of the board, where people
> > browsing the movies will easily see them..
> >
> > So what I'm asking here is for as many people as possible to visit
> > http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/ , join IMDB (free), and vote
> > up/down the good/bad comments. Even a dozen votes or so would likely
> > turn the tide. Vote on the movie, too, as positive comments and votes
> > can only help with sales of the DVD.
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Steve, Thanks
Environment-weather conditions or topography/terrain? Suffice to say-serious
hills/range of at least 30 miles/top speed of 55-60. Due to hills, I believe
it would be a good idea to modify drum brakes to disk. I work a 12 hour
shift and am able to charge it at work.
I like the idea of 12 V AGM batteries-what manufacture is recommended?
Sealed/maintenance free or require watering? I think it would be worth the
extra $ to go with Zilla controller instead of Curtis. PFC charger?
Opinion of Zivan? What about DC/DC?
Don Davidson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Powers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: Bradley GTE Project
> First, you really need to make a list of your specifications, with an
understanding of your actual environment and road conditions.
>
> Top speed needed: Lets say 80 MPH
> Acceleration: lets say 0-40 MPH in 8 sec, 0-60 MPH in 12 sec
> Range: worst case stop and go driving between 0 and 45 MPH = 60 miles
>
> Then, you can start thinking about what batt technology and other
components you want. You could spend a lot of $ on something and get an end
result you weren't really interested in.
>
> The Bradley has room for 16 batts. You could just go with 16 AGM 12 V
batts of similar footprint to the current golf cart batteries = 192 V.
Zilla 1k HV controller, PFC charger, ... and you would have a very nice very
driveable vehicle. Going to NiMH is a whole leap beyond that - and a
substantial amount of $. Is it really worth it, based on your requirements?
I'm not saying the above will do that acceleration and range in the Bradley,
but it should be somewhere close to that.
>
> Steve
>
>
> Don <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I had unlimited $ today, what would be the cost and what would be
involved with modifying my original 96 V DC configuration Bradley GTE with
GE EV1 SCR controller/Lester Charger as Bradley provided to NiMH batteries?
Advantages/disadvantages of considering this approach?
>
> Don Davidson
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call
rates.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rush, James and All,
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: EV controllers? the 4th option...
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:55:47 -0700
>James wrote -
>
>> For someone like Rich to take on a project like this, I
>> feel that it would take something like a subscription
>> project. Everyone who thinks they will want one (or
>more) puts up (for example) $250 to Rich. They get the
>> value of what they put up as a discount on their kit
>> once they are ready and Rich gets the cash to do the
>> project.
>> What do people (and especially Rich, or anyone else who
>> may be in a position to design such a system) think?
>>
>
>
>Well, Jerry Dycus has already done something like this and
>a lot of us supported him. His 3 wheeler is coming along
>nicely. I think it is important to support efforts that
>will benefit all of us. I would have no trouble at all
>contributing an amount for development and then getting a
>discount when 'production' happens.
While our group did work, it didn't work as I
planned, getting about 100 members to put up $25/month for 6
months or so was the plan, but mostly it was 4 people who
have put up 3/4 of it and the rest in lesser amounts that
they could afford. Added to that those with expertise,
goods, tools donated them allowing the Freedom EV to be put
on the road with tooling made for more, for only $15k!!
For a Controller co-op, I'd try for the
club/membership with dues of say $20/month from 100 EV'ers
for several months would be enough to design, test, and put
into production the midle range controllers we need we can't
get now, into production.
To do that, someone people trust to head a group,
though they supported me ;^D, start a member only yahoo
group to make up the designs, prototype building, testing
with volenteers doing most of the design, prototype work.
The head person is very important as they must make
desisions as the group probably never will, just talk it to
death. The leader should open with design susgestions, pick
the best 3 and assign people to flush them out into
prototypes with the groups help, then pick the best driver,
protection,, power stages, features you want, probably by
combining the best of the prototypes. But one person has to
call the shots as otherwise, it won't get done.
Then bid it out to whoever wants to build them or
leave it open source, letting anyone build, improve them.
The ones we need are like the Raptor with 600-800
motor amps. But the unit should be made in the natural
voltage ranges the Fets, ect work at and releatively simple.
With more current available, lower voltage packs with their
inherently lower costs, could be used for more EV's at an
economical price with good performance. It should be modular
so it can be easily, inexpensively fixed by the owner.
So a 72/96vdc for smaller EV's, MC's, a 120-144 for
medium Ev's to 3500 lbs and a higher voltage one for those
would want more power. They should be low priced, like
$500-$800-$1300 respectively about or less. We don't need
another $2k controller.
For series/parrallel you only need a controller
shutdown while switching, not hard as Alltrax has it on
their smaller controllers needed for reverse anyway.
They could be sold as kits too, the possibilities are
endless.
After paying $1300 for my motor/controller. I'm ready
to build my own units and will start on it as soon as the
Freedom EV is into production and have time, money for more
projects.
>
>Developing something of this nature takes time, effort and
>materials. Making sure that Rich has a bank account to draw
>on for development makes sense.
>
>How many people are there on the list? 300 or so? If
>everybody gave $25 that would be $7500... Think of it as
>membership or fees for all the good advice and having our
>questions being answered by some pretty knowledgeable
>people.
There is a lot more listers than that. A
membership idea is excellent for this purpose, spreading the
risk, allowing many more to help.
So who wants to head such a project? You don't
have to be technically versed nessasarily but have a good
idea of what's needed and able to lead others to get it
done. Most of it is settled tech now, we just need to
combine it in the form we need.
With good leadership, we could have controllers
in 4-6 months!! Who will answer the call? This is probably
the most nessasary product needed to make good EV's happen.
Jerry Dycus
>
>Rush
>Tucson AZ
>www.ironandwood.org
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hmm not sure where yo uare looking that you are only finding splined
shafts. Seems to me they are slightly raarer than plain shafts, unless
you are looking at golf-cart or pump motors, or worse yet, surplus
aircradt starter/generators.
Anyway, a brand new ADC k91-4003 would workl well in a motors cycle and I
believe some folks have used these in very small cars. They cost less
than $700 brand new.
Another thing to pay attention too is the motor specs. Many times you can
use a motor for WAY over it's rated specs. Motor manufacturers will often
sell the EXACT same motor to two different companies with two different
labels stating different specs. If a company comes along and needs a
motor and they already have one that will work in that application, they
will simply relabel the existing motor rather than design a new one.
Take for example this 2hp 9" GE motor selling for $200 at Surplus Center:
http://www.surpluscenter.com/item.asp?UID=2006102212332689&item=10-2120&catname=electric
This looks to me like GE took one of their nominal 96V 10hp motors and
slapped a 24V 2hp label on it. Take particular note of the 1050RPM
rating, this motor can easily handle 4 or 5 times this much. This is a
huge motor, I think this is similar to the GE motor that many of the drag
racers like to use. It's even bigger than the GE motor in my pickup.
It's a bit too big for a motorcycle, but would work fine in a car.
> It seems like most surplus / inexpensive motors have splined shafts but
> there must exist some that don't.
>
> What DC motors are there that might be suitable for a large motorcycle or
> small car that cost less than say $400 and have a non splined shaft with a
> keyway?
>
>
--
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.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've got two older EVI ICS-200 units with (now completely obsolete) Yazaki
connectors on them for which I would like, if possible, to simply swap out
the Yazaki connector at the end of the charging cable for an Avcon
connector. Does anyone know if this is possible?
Since EVI is long defunct, I am hoping that I might be able to buy an Avcon
connector from Meltric and properly wire and attach it to the end of the EVI
ICS-200 charging cable after cutting the Yazaki connector off of it. Or if
I have to buy from Meltric the Avcon connector attached to the charging
cable and swap out the entire cable at the ICS-200 box, that would be OK
too. Meltric's Avcon products webpage (www.avconev.com), with the way it
shows a separate, standalone picture of the Avcon connector, would seem to
imply that one can purchase just the Avcon connector (or Avcon connector
attached to charging cable) alone without having to buy the entire powerpack
unit. But then when you click through to the more detailed spec page
(www.avconev.com/artwork/avcon-flyer-02.pdf) that lists the separate part
numbers available for purchase and their respective prices, there is no part
number listed for the Avcon connector alone. It appears that you have to
buy the entire powerpack unit and that only the vehicle inlet is available
as a separate part.
Those of you who have dealt with Meltric (e.g. Tom, Ron), do you know if it
is possible to purchase the Avcon connector itself separately (or attached
to just the charging cable) without having to buy the entire powerpack unit?
Will it work to simply swap out a Yazaki connector for an Avcon connector on
an older EVI ICS-200 unit? Or would the ICS-200 powerpack need a hardware,
firmware, or software upgrade as well? If so, is it possible to get such an
upgrade?
Thanks,
Charles Whalen
Florida EAA
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you have unlimited funds, why select NiMH batteries? They are very
difficult to find in EV size packs. Li-Poly would be a better option.
Anyway, what kind of specs are you looking for? The motor can probably
stay, but you will most likely need to change out the controller and
definitely the charger.
> If I had unlimited $ today, what would be the cost and what would be
> involved with modifying my original 96 V DC configuration Bradley GTE with
> GE EV1 SCR controller/Lester Charger as Bradley provided to NiMH
> batteries? Advantages/disadvantages of considering this approach?
>
> Don Davidson
>
>
--
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.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am curious.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For a speech conference i made recently i worked on some data i found about
RAV4 EV, the most interesting is here:
http://avt.inl.gov/pdf/fsev/sce_rpt/rav4_ind_report.pdf
http://www.evchargernews.com/miscfiles/sce-rav4ev-100k.pdf
100 000miles NIMH on few RAV4 EV cars, these still working with +80% initial
capacity (range) is not a thing we can qualify of a "not succesfull
experiment"...but Toyota claimed such to close their EV program ! BIG shame
to them !
In France we have an expression: "prendre les gens pour des cons"
which resume perfectly Toyota(and GM etc...) attitude and be translated as :
thinking people are all stupid and so will trust anything even stupid things
!
cordialement,
Philippe
Et si le pot d'échappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
Forum de discussion sur les véhicules électriques
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
----- Original Message -----
From: "doug korthof" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 6:46 PM
Subject: Faults of the EV1
> >"From: Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Subject: Who did kill the
electric car?
> >"The EV1 was...an extremely complex car, hand-built, with a million
refinements and new bits of
> >technology. It looked sleek, but at what cost...everyone paid attention
to the EV1; and by doing so they
> >missed the RAV4, the minivan, the S10's..."
>
> Problems with the EV1:
> 1. It was a purpose-built frame, EXPENSIVE.
> 2. Built for lead-acid batteries, with minimal wind-resistence and the
most batteries in an enclosed "T" tunnel to see what can be done to make an
efficient car (took off from sunraycer), EXPERIMENTAL.
> 3. CONTRARILY, Publicized with NiMH batteries, which don't do well in an
enclosed small tunnel due to heat buildup during charging.
> 4. General POOR GM WORKMANSHIP, and besides, the 1997 was done by
engineers, without much help from car-guys: swayed on acceleration, bad
tension on windshield (blew out at 50K miles like clockwork), bad seals on
windshield (leaked in rain), rushed design on "magnecharger" input port
(wrong gauge wiring, led to one fire), the inductive charger itself
(originally designed to save 70 lbs. by putting the charger off the car, to
save weight, not needed with NiMH), failure-prone input-port cooling fan
(use garden hose to cool charge-port when it failed), the door design and
wiring were non-car-standard, an experimenters' playground but not a
Manufacturing Engineer's cup of tea. Or coffee, FTM. Lots of other little
issues that even EV1 afficionados will cop to.
>
> The design flitted back and forth between ideas of what the car was to be
used for, and different technologies to get there. For example, Smith drove
it into the 1990 auto show under the impression that it would have NiMH
batteries, which it was not designed for. GM, loathe to do any work on it,
reluctantly released it with inferior, failure-prone Delco batteries in 1997
at an outrageous $599/month "boomerang" lease. The NiMH version required a
cooling system, which GM over-engineered, and only under pressure released
260 of the NiMH 1999 version in Dec., 1999, after it sat on the tarmac for
over 18 months. The remaining (about 185) were dribbled out over the next
few months to select recipients, while leaving (reputedly) 20 to zoom around
the GM test site in Michigan, where they are still hidden, used for bigwigs
and buttheads.
>
> GM's design, management and engineering battles whip-sawed the EV1 back
and forth, reworking, changing and re-designing, with new ideas and weird
ideas piled on engineering experiments such as inductive charging, bringing
the total costs charged to the project (including management hot-shots,
galas, and general corporate mis-management) to an alleged $1B. This
outrageous number has been quoted again and again by GM apologists such as
Dave Barthmuss, with little explanation of the 15-year career of items
charged to it, and what value-added for each charge. At this costing, each
EV1 would come in at (more than) an outrageous $800,000 each. But anyone
who has worked in aerospace engineering knows that a matrix of alleged
costs, like spiderwebs, can be spun across any door.
>
> In 1996, the Japanese took a value-engineering look at it and went with
NiMH batteries, which they improved markedly, finally getting over 100
amp-hours by 2003, but mainly:
>
> 1- Used existing frames as "gliders" (Honda CRX, I think, RAV4, etc.)
LOWER COST.
> 2- Putting the NiMH batteries in a pan under the EV, so that cooling would
be easier BETTER ENGINEERING.
> 3- Constantly improved Battery and Thermal Managment Systems.
> 4- High-quality Japanese construction, with good weights-and-balance
analysis of battery positioning.
> 5- Simpler PM 3-ph brushless motor-controller, much LOWER COST, minimal
performance degradation.
>
> This resulted in a dramatic lowering of the cost for the Japanese versions
of ZEV cars.
>
> Honda's per-car costing was (confidentially related to me) $254,000 per
car for 330 EV-Plus cars, or less than $100M for the entire program.
Assuming Toyota's design and startup costs were similar or less for the 500
EV-specific RAV4-EV parts, that would make the entire Toyota "production"
run of an estimated 2000 RAV4-EV (using the 1996-1999 RAV4 body) less than
$200M. Thus, at most $100,000 per RAV4-EV, and probably MUCH less.
>
> This dramatic cost, quality and design difference illustrates the
inferiority of GM engineering and design work, IMO, and also shows, in
miniature, why GM and Ford are self-imploding.
>
> GOOD POINT that everyone seems to ignore or just plain misses the
excellent, work-horse quality of the RAV4-EV, which is not just well
designed from an ergonomic standpoint but also has internal sophistication
from the battery to the PM motor. These RAV4-EV are STILL RUNNING, with
virtually NO REPAIRS or maintenance, faultlessly using the Toyota-Panasonic
EV-95 NiMH battery which stopped production in late 2002 or early 2003. The
S-10E and USE S-10 are still running, too, although they have inferior
batteries and reported battery-replacement problems.
>
--- End Message ---
