EV Digest 6100
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Pickup truck drag
by "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Charging into the future
by "ROBERT GOUDREAU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: FS: Vicor DC-DC Converter
by Tony Furr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Pickup truck drag
by "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: EV shows - crazy idea?
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) speedometer replacement
by mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
by "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
by Tehben Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: speedometer replacement
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: speedometer replacement
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12) Re: Lee your BMS anyone else interested?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Heaters
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Lee your BMS anyone else interested?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Input requested on heater assembly
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: speedometer replacement
by Steve Condie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Lithium-ion batteries & Valence Group buy
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: Vicor DC-DC Converter
by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Don wrote -
> To me it seems both of you are not referencing to the same exact truck going
> the same speed. From what others have posted different trucks and different
> bed lengths affect the aerodynamics.
>
> About just the tailgate being up or down. Since all pickups do not have the
> same aerodynamics no one is going to know for sure unless you do your own
> testing. This is not a case of one test applies to all trucks regardless of
> size
> or shape and at all speeds.
>
> For a short bed Ranger and S-10 tailgate up with bedcover has been tested
> and produces the best aerodynamics for legal highway speeds.
I downloaded a paper, 2005-01-04=547, from www.SAE.org yesterday (cost me
$12.00), entitled 'CFD Simulations for Flow Over Pickup Trucks', by some GM
engineers. One of the conclusions was "Compared with the short box case, the
drag coefficient for the long box case was found to be LOWER". (Caps mine)
So again we have a study that says one thing and somebody that says another....
This is typical of studies... they are sort of like the bible, they can be
shown to prove everything.
Even if there is a disadvantage/advantage to having the tailgate up/down, it
probably so minimal that it is not worth the time we have spent on it.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY
Charging into the future
Cedar Park startup bets it can produce a mass-market power storage device
for electric cars.
By Dan Zehr
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Tucked away in a Cedar Park business center, a small startup called EEStor
Inc. is building an energy storage device that could finally usher in the
era of the electric car. Or the company's technology could fizzle out like
all the other ideas that were destined to banish the internal-combustion
engine to a quaint corner of the Smithsonian.
Given the all-or-nothing buzz building around EEStor (pronounced E-Store),
it comes as no surprise the company has said almost nothing publicly. It
declined to comment for this story as well. But a patent the company earned
in April, along with a $3 million investment from the world's top venture
capital firm, hints that EEStor might be closer to "all" than it is to
"nothing."
The company has come up with a new method for making ultracapacitors,
battery-like devices that can store large amounts of electricity. EEStor's
energy storage unit can hold enough charge to power a car 300 miles,
according to its patent, and it can be recharged in the time it takes to
pump a tank of gas. And it can do that at only a small, if any, premium to
the cost of a gas-powered engine.
"That's why the technology that EEStor is developing really breaks the
mold," said Ian Clifford, CEO of Feel Good Cars Corp., a Canadian
electric-vehicle company that has signed a deal to put EEStor units in its
cars. "It's low weight, low cost and it has the rapid recharge technology
that suddenly makes electric vehicles viable."
Those barriers have kept electric vehicles off the road in any significant
numbers, Clifford said, and the situation will remain that way until
manufacturers can produce a vehicle that acts much more like a
gasoline-powered car.
In the 1990s, the major automakers sold several thousand electric cars under
California's zero-emissions mandate. The cars built a small but devoted
following, but their range was too limited to catch on more broadly. Under
pressure by the automakers, the state overturned the mandate in 2003.
By then, a pair of longtime computer industry veterans already were
tinkering around with the idea of building a better power storage device.
Richard Weir and Carl Nelson started working together in the 1990s,
developing new surfaces for hard-disk drives.
Weir was a former Marine pilot and IBM Corp. researcher. After studying and
working at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Nelson spent decades
developing new disk technologies.
In their EEStor patent, the duo describes a technology that overcomes
electric vehicles' range, cost and power deficiencies. Their capacitors can
pack a bigger punch in a package that's smaller and lighter than batteries,
the patent said.
"For transportation applications, you need to store a lot of energy in a
small space — you need a lot of energy density," said Robert Hebner,
director of the University of Texas Center for Electromechanics. "We can
store all the energy we want, but if you have to haul a trailer along behind
every car to store the energy, it's not a viable solution in the
marketplace."
And since capacitors don't require chemical processes to store power, EEStor
said in its patent, the materials the company uses are safer and
environmentally friendly.
But the tough part is taking it from paper to practice, said Hebner, who
said he has talked with Weir and Nelson about their ideas.
"I like to be real careful about what I say works, unless I have some
independent way of knowing," he said. "But it could (work). I didn't see any
voodoo in what they were trying to do."
In fact, he said, the science behind capacitors has been well understood for
more than a century. The devices put opposite electrical charges on a pair
of conductive plates. The two plates are kept close enough to maintain the
electrical field but far enough to keep the charges from cancelling out.
Think of it as a grilled-cheese sandwich: The bread holds opposite charges.
The cheese helps maintain the opposing charges, even as it separates the
bread and keeps those charges from canceling each other out. Then you stack
one layer atop another.
"It's real simple," Hebner said. "It's just two pieces of metal with some
material in between them. You put a voltage across them and they store a
certain amount of charge."
The hard part is making them efficient enough to store more and more power.
Most research has focused on ways to increase the surface area of the plates
so they can hold a greater charge. To use the grilled-cheese example, the
nooks and crannies of a rough piece of bread can hold more butter than a
smoother slice of the same size.
Earlier this year, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said its
researchers were developing plates made of super-small nanotubes that would
vastly increase surface area on the same size plate.
Weir and Nelson have gone the other direction: They're focusing on the
cheese instead of the bread. Different types of cheese — and thinner slices
of it — help store more powerful charges. EEStor's patent describes a method
that takes a really good cheese and creates an extremely thin layer of it.
"Everybody in the business knows all this stuff," Hebner said. "You know
what materials you have to use, but can you make them well enough, and put
the right coatings in place, and control the process well enough?
"The answer to that has always been no in the past."
Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers has bet $3 million that EEStor has the
answer. It's one of a handful of Texas companies to attract the support of
the venture capital firm that produced such hits as Amazon.com and Google.
(Among the firm's Texas investments were two Austin companies — Tivoli
Systems Inc., which IBM Corp. bought for $743 million in 1996, and Broadwing
Corp. in Austin, which last month agreed to a $1.4 billion acquisition offer
from Level 3 Communications Inc.)
Kleiner Perkins declined to confirm its EEStor investment. However, the
funding has been noted in at least one regulatory filing, and a brief
BusinessWeek.com report last fall said the firm made the investment in July
2005.
John Doerr, one of its top partners, told an investment conference in
January that an energy storage company was the firm's "highest-risk,
highest-reward" investment. While he didn't name the startup, many observers
have said he was referring to EEStor.
No doubt Kleiner Perkins relied on the track records Weir and Nelson brought
to their current venture. The pair have a long history of collaboration and
joint research, including almost 20 patents that names one or both of them.
Most of their patents came throughout the 1990s, as they worked to develop a
new surface for the disks used in computer hard drives.
Weir and Nelson were developing a disk that used a very thin, precise and
consistent surface of titanium alloys. The titanium-based materials could
store more data than the aluminum used at the time. But the idea never took
off, said Gary Hultquist, a venture capitalist who was CEO of Titanium X
Corp., a company Weir and Nelson founded in California.
The technology was never the problem, Hultquist said. The company simply
couldn't narrow the gap between the cost of their disks and the benefit of
their increased storage capacity.
"I wouldn't put anything past them," he said.
Hultquist said Kleiner Perkins asked him about Weir and Nelson before making
its investment in EEStor.
But it was Ed Beardsworth who first introduced the venture capital firm to
Weir and Nelson. Beardsworth used to publish a report called Utility Federal
Technology Opportunities.
"I just kept my eyes and ears open everywhere," Beardsworth said. "Somebody
put me on to (Weir) and put me in touch with him. He took a liking to me and
showed me what he was doing, and I introduced him to some interested
parties."
Beardsworth declined to name any of the venture capitalists to which he
introduced Weir, but he got a first-hand description of what EEStor was
developing. In his May 2004 report, he said the company expected to
eventually produce its energy storage devices for as little as $2,100 —
roughly half the cost of a standard gas engine and power train.
"It would be significant if it did happen, anything close to what he's
talking about," Beardsworth said last week.
Whether it portends a dramatic shift from gasoline-powered cars is an
entirely separate question, though. Larger EEStor units could be used at a
network of recharging stations, much like gas stations now. But few people
expect such a broad network — with enough electric vehicles to support it —
to be created anytime soon.
"To try to match the internal-combustion performance and range with an
electric is a bit of a stretch," said Tom Asmus, who for 30 years designed
engines at Chrysler.
"People have been waiting for a breakthrough in battery technology for, oh,
about 100 years," said Asmus, who retired in Michigan three years ago.
"Scientists have been swarming about it for so many years, the change is
going to come in small packages."
But even if its technology doesn't hit the mainstream, EEStor has other
strategies in mind. Its patent hints at military or electricity-provider
uses. Wind- or solar-energy farms could use the technology to store power,
letting it provide power on demand instead of depending on the weather.
But there's little doubt the company's biggest target is automotive. EEStor
is building a production line in Cedar Park. Feel Good Cars had expected to
receive some of the energy storage units by now.
"There have been slight delays, completely acceptable delays from our
perspective," said Clifford, the electric car company's CEO. "For this,
we're happy to wait."
http://www.statesman.com/business/content/business/stories/technology/11/05/5eestor.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rush wrote:
> According to what JJ just wrote -
>
> >U1-12XP/RT - $860 usd
> >U24-12XP/RT - $2030 usd
> >U27-12XP/RT - $2550 usd
> >UEV-18XP - $1935 usd
> >U-BMS - $135 usd
> >U-BDI - $40 usd
>
> My understand is that a BMS *IS* needed so -
> A 120v pack of U1's would be (10 x $860) $8600
> with a 40ah rating at c/5
> Plus the BMS (10 x 135), $1350 would be $9,950
OK; slight misunderstanding here. Each Valence module includes built-in
cell monitoring/balancing circuitry. Each module has a pair of ~6" long
pigtails that are used to daisychain the internal circuitry from each
module on a common bus, and you then hang *one* (optional) U-BMS module
off the bus.
So, the 120V pack costs are slightly lower:
10 x U1 + U-BMS = 10 x $860 + $135 = $8735 (40Ah)
10 x U24 + U-BMS = 10 x $2030 + $135 = $20435 (100Ah)
10 x U27 + U-BMS = 10 x $2550 + $135 = $25635 (130Ah)
> (in
> http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20RT%20DS%20Jan06.pdf
> , they say "Series connection up to four (4) batteries
> (60 Volt. > max system voltage" what does that mean?)
This has been discussed previously: there are 2 flavours of U-Charge
module, the RT-series and the XP-series. Only the XP-series modules are
suitable for EV use. The internal circuitry used in the RT-series
modules limit their max current to a low level and limit the maximum
series string voltage they may be used in to 60V (4 x 12V, taking the
charge voltage into account).
I think the UEV-18XP is a very attractive model for on-road EV packs; it
has the same 300A 30-second pulse current spec as the larger U24 & U27
models, but is 1.5x the voltage, so takes fewer modules to build a set
voltage pack. Other Valence literature shows discharge data at upto at
least 10C for the Saphion cells, which suggests even the 65Ah UEV-18XPs
could handle a lightweight EV even with modest pack voltage.
Here's another perspective, where I've also shown the 27% discount
quoted previously for qty 50-249 modules:
Qty. Qty. Nominal C/5 Nominal Qty 1-49
1-49 50-249 voltage Ah Wh $/Wh
======== ===== ====== ======= === ======= ========
U1-12XP $860 $628 12.8 40 512 $1.68
U24-12XP $2030 $1482 12.8 100 1280 $1.59
U27-12XP $2550 $1862 12.8 140 1792 $1.42
UEV-18XP $1935 $1413 19.2 65 1248 $1.55
> Obviously the lead acids weigh more, have more voltage sag,
> won't discharge as deeply, etc.... have lots of 'problems'
> compared to the Lion's, but from a straight dollars to donuts
> comparison, I'll stay with the lead acids.
Your comparison is a bit biased since you are comparing the Valence
modules to the cheapest, lowest performance PbA alternative. I think a
more realistic picture is to compare them to sealed PbA, such as
Optimas. Taking my own EV as an example:
10 x YT: $1600, about 35Ah @ 120V, ~430lbs
7 x UEV-18XP: $13545, 65Ah @ 126V, 231lbs
Now, the Valence pack offers 2x the capacity of the YTs, so the cost of
an equivalent pack of buddy pairs would actually be $3200 and weigh
860lbs, nearly 4x the Valence pack.
So, the Valence pack is about 4x the cost of an equivalent capacity pack
of YTs. But wait, conventional wisdom dictates that if I use YTs, I
really need a set of regs on it, so add another $450 to the YT cost.
Obviously, the regs don't get replaced each time the YTs do, but just
buying them once drops the Valence pack to 3x the cost of the Yts (i.e.
after buying the regs, I can buy 3 sets of YTs before having spent the
cost of the UEV-18XP pack). Even this comparison is slightly biased in
favour of the PbA since with the addition of the ($135) U-BMS to the
Valence pack, I really have the equivalent of the Mk3 regs, which are
about 50% more costly than the Mk2b's I've assumed.
In this case, I think the Valence pack actually looks fairly favourable
costwise since its "thousands" of cycles will likely translate into a
useful life equal or greater to that of 3 sets of YTs. It also has a
huge advantage over the YTs pack in that I simply don't have the space
in my EV for a double string of Yts, and I'd have the added expense of
beefing up the suspension to handle the weight (which would put me over
GVWR and turn my car into more of a lead sled).
I think that if your vehicle is able to use the more economical flooded
PbA and still meet your performance needs, then "exotic" batteries such
as the Valence are probably a poor choice, but if you aren't able to use
these cheapest of the PbA, then the Valence modules look a whole lot
better.
> I got the cycle life from Trojanproductspecsguide.pdf, from
> their website. They say 492 LEU's, Trojans way of measuring,
> but I just rounded it up to 500 for ease.
This is not cycle life. Trojan's "LEU"'s are "lifetime energy units",
and are Trojan's proprietary way of describing battery life in terms of
lifetime energy throughput, not cycles. They use LEUs rather than
lifetime kWh to make it impossible to compare these values to anything
other than other Trojan models.
You can't really compare LEUs with cycles.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Like I said, my car has no extras, including a cigarette lighter.
Actually, I could just run my small 12v charger onboard and charge at
the same time.
But I charge in the alley behind my house, so my traction charge is
already running off a long extension.
I rotate through the four spare SLA batteries I received with the
car. They are small, so i often carry a fully-charged second with me
(tucked in the car cover) to change out at work if needed.
It's really less of a hassle than it sounds and takes me a couple
minutes to switch out. Plus I have an additional 12v charger under my
desk at work.
t
On Nov 4, 2006, at 1:20 PM, Cor van de Water wrote:
Hi Tony,
Why rotate batteries?
I charge my 12v Aux battery by plugging a power supply
into the cigarette lighter plug every night and feeding
the battery under the hood at the same time as feeding
the batteries under the bed.
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 Tony Furr
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 10:50 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: FS: Vicor DC-DC Converter
Thanks for the advice Lee. That's good to know.
I asked the Vicor engineer from support if there was any way the unit
would start below 200vdc, but of course he didn't mention disabling
the input voltage sensing circuit. Guess it's not their policy to
tell people how to hack their hardware.
I would consider trying this out, but i've already sold the unit. For
now I'll probably just keep rotating charged aux batteries until
investing in something with the right spec. Besides, moving these
batteries around helps keep me in shape.
t
On Nov 4, 2006, at 10:11 AM, Lee Hart wrote:
Tony Furr wrote:
The problem is not the output voltage, which could be reduced.
It's the input voltage bottom end. At a low-line of 200vdc, my
144v car won't start the DC-DC converter.
The internal Vicor DC/DC modules themselves will actually work
below their rated voltage. For instance, a 300vdc nominal module is
rated to work at 200-400vdc, but will actually start working at
about 120-140vdc.
However, it can't deliver its rated power output at reduced input
voltage. As the input voltage falls, the input current goes up to
compensate. If you try to get full power at reduced input voltage,
the module will overheat and fail.
So, Vicor includes a little circuit to sense the input voltage, and
disable the modules if it is too low. You can find and defeat this
circuit if you like. Basically, you cut the wire to the "Gate In"
pin of the master control module.
Now the modules will work with your 144vdc pack; but they can burn
up if you ask them to deliver too much current. To prevent this,
use a lower current fuse or circuit breaker in the output. A safe
value for this fuse or breaker is 1/2 the normal rated current for
that module.
Or, you can trim the output voltage down so it never tries to
deliver full power. The ones you have are apparently rated for 14v
to 30.8v; if adjusted to 14v, it should never deliver more than
half its rated power anyway.
If you got a good price on the unit and like it, I'd defeat the
undervoltage shutdown, and adjust the output down to 14v, and try
it on your 144v pack. Measure the baseplate temperature; if it gets
too hot to comfortably leave your hand on, then you need to further
reduce the output power with a lower-rated fuse or circuit breaker
as described above. Good luck!
--
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 ---
Cor wrote -
> If you want a pichup because you use it as a utility
> vehicle (not to commute in to work with your briefcase)
> then all you can do is check the aero mods that someone
> posted some pictures of a while ago, including a
> tapered bed cover and belly pan.
http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&storyid=870
and here
http://www.metrompg.com/posts/grille-blocking-part-2.htm
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
Paul G. wrote:
Currently, it seems, photos from EV shows and races are scattered all
over the web. Past shows can be hard to find and I wonder if I found
all the good photos. I am considering creating a web site, (along the
lines of the EValbum) but dedicated to EV shows, races and other EV
gatherings. I own the domain EVfun and I thought it would be a good
web home for EVents.
Sounds like a great idea!
It would be easiest to host the photos on this web site, that would in
no way restrict the photographer or club from having the photos on
their web site too.
Good, I like the way you've planned this. I'd be happy to send gobs of
EV show photos, race EVent photos, EV breakfast get-togethers, etc. that
I have, but I'd also like to be able to still have some at my web page, too.
Good idea? Crazy talk? I welcome the lists input!
Go for it. It can only further spread the positive fun vibes surrounding
being an EVer, and perhaps get more to join in with us!
See Ya.....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
After tearing my dash board apart in 86 toyota pu, I
was wondering about the speedometer. It takes up lots
of space, and gives very little information.
Is there a ev replacement part that would snap into
place for the speed and odometer?
What options do I have?
thanks
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things
done faster.
(http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roger,
This is just the kind of detailed criticism/analysis that I need. I know a
little about batteries, mainly the Trojans because those are the ones that I've
studied the most. And to have you come back with more knowledge and expertise
is great.
But I really can't afford a $26,000 pack at this point so I'll stay with the
cheap T-125's ;-)
Thanks
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
Roger wrote -
> Rush wrote:
>
>> According to what JJ just wrote -
>>
>> >U1-12XP/RT - $860 usd
>> >U24-12XP/RT - $2030 usd
>> >U27-12XP/RT - $2550 usd
>> >UEV-18XP - $1935 usd
>> >U-BMS - $135 usd
>> >U-BDI - $40 usd
>>
>> My understand is that a BMS *IS* needed so -
>> A 120v pack of U1's would be (10 x $860) $8600
>> with a 40ah rating at c/5
>> Plus the BMS (10 x 135), $1350 would be $9,950
>
> OK; slight misunderstanding here. Each Valence module includes built-in
> cell monitoring/balancing circuitry. Each module has a pair of ~6" long
> pigtails that are used to daisychain the internal circuitry from each
> module on a common bus, and you then hang *one* (optional) U-BMS module
> off the bus.
>
> So, the 120V pack costs are slightly lower:
>
> 10 x U1 + U-BMS = 10 x $860 + $135 = $8735 (40Ah)
> 10 x U24 + U-BMS = 10 x $2030 + $135 = $20435 (100Ah)
> 10 x U27 + U-BMS = 10 x $2550 + $135 = $25635 (130Ah)
>
>> (in
>> http://www.valence.com/pdffiles/U-Charge%20RT%20DS%20Jan06.pdf
>> , they say "Series connection up to four (4) batteries
>> (60 Volt. > max system voltage" what does that mean?)
>
> This has been discussed previously: there are 2 flavours of U-Charge
> module, the RT-series and the XP-series. Only the XP-series modules are
> suitable for EV use. The internal circuitry used in the RT-series
> modules limit their max current to a low level and limit the maximum
> series string voltage they may be used in to 60V (4 x 12V, taking the
> charge voltage into account).
>
> I think the UEV-18XP is a very attractive model for on-road EV packs; it
> has the same 300A 30-second pulse current spec as the larger U24 & U27
> models, but is 1.5x the voltage, so takes fewer modules to build a set
> voltage pack. Other Valence literature shows discharge data at upto at
> least 10C for the Saphion cells, which suggests even the 65Ah UEV-18XPs
> could handle a lightweight EV even with modest pack voltage.
>
> Here's another perspective, where I've also shown the 27% discount
> quoted previously for qty 50-249 modules:
>
> Qty. Qty. Nominal C/5 Nominal Qty 1-49
> 1-49 50-249 voltage Ah Wh $/Wh
> ======== ===== ====== ======= === ======= ========
> U1-12XP $860 $628 12.8 40 512 $1.68
> U24-12XP $2030 $1482 12.8 100 1280 $1.59
> U27-12XP $2550 $1862 12.8 140 1792 $1.42
> UEV-18XP $1935 $1413 19.2 65 1248 $1.55
>
>> Obviously the lead acids weigh more, have more voltage sag,
>> won't discharge as deeply, etc.... have lots of 'problems'
>> compared to the Lion's, but from a straight dollars to donuts
>> comparison, I'll stay with the lead acids.
>
> Your comparison is a bit biased since you are comparing the Valence
> modules to the cheapest, lowest performance PbA alternative. I think a
> more realistic picture is to compare them to sealed PbA, such as
> Optimas. Taking my own EV as an example:
>
> 10 x YT: $1600, about 35Ah @ 120V, ~430lbs
> 7 x UEV-18XP: $13545, 65Ah @ 126V, 231lbs
>
> Now, the Valence pack offers 2x the capacity of the YTs, so the cost of
> an equivalent pack of buddy pairs would actually be $3200 and weigh
> 860lbs, nearly 4x the Valence pack.
>
> So, the Valence pack is about 4x the cost of an equivalent capacity pack
> of YTs. But wait, conventional wisdom dictates that if I use YTs, I
> really need a set of regs on it, so add another $450 to the YT cost.
> Obviously, the regs don't get replaced each time the YTs do, but just
> buying them once drops the Valence pack to 3x the cost of the Yts (i.e.
> after buying the regs, I can buy 3 sets of YTs before having spent the
> cost of the UEV-18XP pack). Even this comparison is slightly biased in
> favour of the PbA since with the addition of the ($135) U-BMS to the
> Valence pack, I really have the equivalent of the Mk3 regs, which are
> about 50% more costly than the Mk2b's I've assumed.
>
> In this case, I think the Valence pack actually looks fairly favourable
> costwise since its "thousands" of cycles will likely translate into a
> useful life equal or greater to that of 3 sets of YTs. It also has a
> huge advantage over the YTs pack in that I simply don't have the space
> in my EV for a double string of Yts, and I'd have the added expense of
> beefing up the suspension to handle the weight (which would put me over
> GVWR and turn my car into more of a lead sled).
>
> I think that if your vehicle is able to use the more economical flooded
> PbA and still meet your performance needs, then "exotic" batteries such
> as the Valence are probably a poor choice, but if you aren't able to use
> these cheapest of the PbA, then the Valence modules look a whole lot
> better.
>
>> I got the cycle life from Trojanproductspecsguide.pdf, from
>> their website. They say 492 LEU's, Trojans way of measuring,
>> but I just rounded it up to 500 for ease.
>
> This is not cycle life. Trojan's "LEU"'s are "lifetime energy units",
> and are Trojan's proprietary way of describing battery life in terms of
> lifetime energy throughput, not cycles. They use LEUs rather than
> lifetime kWh to make it impossible to compare these values to anything
> other than other Trojan models.
>
> You can't really compare LEUs with cycles.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK, is the 35Ah for the lead the usable capacity or the rated capacity?
And on the 65Ah Valence batt can you discharge it to zero without
hurting it?
-Tehben
On Nov 4, 2006, at 5:35 PM, Roger Stockton wrote:
10 x YT: $1600, about 35Ah @ 120V, ~430lbs
7 x UEV-18XP: $13545, 65Ah @ 126V, 231lbs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Mike,
Cyberdyne Electronic Instrumentation has a combination speedometer,
tachometer, odometer and trip odometer in a 3-3/8 diameter unit something
like the Link 10 E-meter.
It will display 0 to 999 mph, 10,000 rpm, million mile odometer and speed
calibration. It normally takes off the ignition system of a 2,4,6 or 8
cylinder engine to measure the rpm and then calibrate the speed according to
the rpm.
The speed sensor of a controller circuit can provided the data to a
tachometer. My tachometer is a Stewart Warner that receives this data from
the Zilla which in turn receives the rpm data from a motor rpm sender.
The Cyberdyne unit may require a Cyberdyne speed sensor if your controller
does not have a tach output circuit.
Source is jegs.com
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "mike golub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 8:40 PM
Subject: speedometer replacement
> After tearing my dash board apart in 86 toyota pu, I
> was wondering about the speedometer. It takes up lots
> of space, and gives very little information.
> Is there a ev replacement part that would snap into
> place for the speed and odometer?
> What options do I have?
>
> thanks
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________________________
> Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get
> things done faster.
> (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta)
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 11/4/2006 9:26:11 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 8:40 PM
Subject: speedometer replacement
> After tearing my dash board apart in 86 toyota pu, I
> was wondering about the speedometer. It takes up lots
> of space, and gives very little information.
> Is there a ev replacement part that would snap into
> place for the speed and odometer?
> What options do I have?
>
I instrumented my trike with a Sigma bicycle speedometer. Cost - $23
dollars, delivered.
Uses a magnet pickup that clips to the spokes. I set the input once on set
up by calculating the circumference of the wheel involved. Runs off an
internal lithium battery that's supposed to be good for three years. Also
tells
time, total miles, trip miles, speed, top speed achieved since it was last
cleared. I clear it each night as I plug the charger in. Allows easy KwH per
days' miles calculations.
Matt Parkhouse
Colorado Springs, CO
BMW m/c-Golf Cart trike - 48 volts, 30mph on the flat, 35 mile range
1.6 cents a mile
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Cor van de Water wrote:
Lee,
I was wondering about features of the balancer.
You mentioned that it took you a while to find out
that you had a bad battery, because the balancer
would continuously "prop it up" from the other 11
to keep it going. How did you find out one was bad?
There are LEDs on the Control board that show which battery is currently
being charged. I noticed that one particular battery seemed to be
selected the most often, but didn't pay enough attention to it to notice
that it was actually spending 90% of the time on this one battery. It
finally became obvious when it reached 100%, i.e. it became impossible
to put enough charge into this one battery.
The digital multimeter also displays the voltage of the currently
selected battery. But this voltage changes frequently, depending on
charge or discharge, so by itself it doesn't mean much.
The Balancer has a serial port that was outputting data for a dash
display, but I never got around to designing or building it. I
occasionally plugged a laptop into it, mainly to examine or change the
program that the Balancer was running. It was rarely present when I was
actually driving.
It may have merit to indicate a (yellow) light when
the balancer is spending more than twice the average
time on a battery, to have an early indication that
one or more batteries are going south.
And does your BMS indicate (red) when a battery goes
below 10.5V to avoid damaging it, even though the BMS
is propping it up, it cannot supply the full drive
current. In extreme cases, a battery could reverse
and damage the BMS.
With the "idiot light" on the dash telling that a
battery is below 10.5V the driver can ease the foot
on the accelerator and limp to a safe place without
breaking anything.
These are excellent ideas. The outputs are there; it just takes a bit of
programming to decide when to activate them, and connecting the LEDs.
Lately, I have designed an LED display with sixteen 7-segment displays,
arranged as four 4-digit numbers. I plan to use it as the dashboard
display for the rev.B Balancer.
In the case where one weak battery is the limit, the EV
would even be driveable after waiting a bit, because the
balancer will re-charge the weak battery and you can go
a little further again, until home or the 10.5V is reached
for all batteries, then you need to bring the plug to the
EV or tow it.
Exactly!
I have a 15 amp DC/DC on my Balancer; thus, I could drive with one
battery totally bad (zero amphours) if I kept the current under 15 amps.
The car would only creep, but it could still get me home!
--
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 ---
Tom Gocze wrote:
Now that it is the heating season... It seems that a startup resistor
with the rectactor controller solves this problem without all the
hassle of lots of high cost silicon. Wouldn't it make sense for
someone to package a three step (24/48/96V) or perhaps 36/72/144V?)
system with a big starting resistor?
That's an interesting idea. A starting resistor certainly can make a lot
of heat if you keep it in the circuit. Probably a lot more than you want!
But since it's an all-or-nothing device, you need some way to store the
large peak heat, and meter it out gradually as needed. Perhaps you can
put the resistor in a water tank, so it heats water. Then run the hot
water through the heater core to gradually cool it off until the next
time you engage the resistor.
--
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 ---
Cor van de Water wrote:
Lee,
What would be needed to use your balancer on a pack of 26 batteries?
I tried to figure it out from the schematics and I can see that
there is a limit of 15 currently.
The old design was set up for two relay boards. Each relay board handles
8 batteries. One position was reserved for "all off", so 15 batteries
was the normal limit. But you could use the three auxiliary relays to
bank switch pairs of relay boards, thus extending it to 30, 45, or 60
batteries.
The new design is set up for 10 relay boards. Each relay board handles 8
batteries, so you can go to 80 batteries without tricks.
(Do you have the sample source code, I could not find it on the
Balancerland website)
Each balancer's code was unique to the particular user's setup. I can
supply sample code, though it's not pretty (I'm no programmer :-)
I like the idea of using the DC/DC also to charge the aux battery,
avoiding to have 2 DC/DC converters. Only drawback is that during
driving the voltage is lower than normal in a car with alternator
cranking the voltage up to 14V or somewhere close.
Correct, unless you program it to just stay on the 12v aux battery while
driving, and only balance while parked or charging.
Also, since the truck has so many aux loads (vacuum pump, power
steering pump and then the normal fans and pumps and electronics)
I think about installing a high current DC/DC, which means that
the relays would need to be higher current rating and cannot be
PCB mounted.
The relays are rated at 30 amps. Do you need more than this?
Maybe I should stick with a Vicor 300V module and have a separate
DC/DC for the aux battery.
That works too. The terminals are there to use a booster module with the
Vicor as well.
--
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 ---
John wrote:
Now I fear the the thermal fuse I show in my picture may not be
appropriate. It is a replacement part for home appliances running on
120v AC.
http://www.goodmans.net/get_item_th-tf77c_thermal-fuse-77-degrees-celsius.htm
This will be OK at 12vdc, but it could not switch more than about 30vdc
i.e. 1/4th of its AC ratings, unless otherwise marked.
1) 12V + to stock fuse panel in the truck (currently a 10 amp fuse)
2) Fuse panel to stock blower relay (relay closes when fan control is
anywhere other than off. For reasons I don't understand the truck
computer wanted to know when the fan was on)
3) Blower relay to manual rocker switch (rated for 20amps 12V DC
purchased from Pep Boys) to be installed on the dash somewhere
4) rocker switch to thermal fuse
5) thermal fuse to 12 v + on KTA heater relay package with snubber network
6) KTA relay to ground.
So when the blower and rocker switch are both on, and the thermal fuse
is still closed, the KTA relay closes and sends traction voltage to the
heater element.
Should this work and be safe?
That sounds pretty good.
One concern I have is that the blower is a PM motor; that means it also
works fine as a generator. When you cut power to it, it takes a while to
spin down. During this time, it *generates* power. This power will hold
your heater relay on. The relay will s-l-o-w-l-y drop out as the fans
spins down. This causes an excessively slow turnoff time; the relay
contacts will burn and arc, and can fail shorted. If this happens,
nothing will turn the heater off.
--
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 ---
I'm seriously considering getting a GPS unit for my Tropica (which is
speedo-less, along with being just about everything else-less) and using it for
speedometer function 99% of the time. Has anyone else tried this?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/4/2006 9:26:11 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 8:40 PM
Subject: speedometer replacement
> After tearing my dash board apart in 86 toyota pu, I
> was wondering about the speedometer. It takes up lots
> of space, and gives very little information.
> Is there a ev replacement part that would snap into
> place for the speed and odometer?
> What options do I have?
>
I instrumented my trike with a Sigma bicycle speedometer. Cost - $23
dollars, delivered.
Uses a magnet pickup that clips to the spokes. I set the input once on set
up by calculating the circumference of the wheel involved. Runs off an
internal lithium battery that's supposed to be good for three years. Also
tells
time, total miles, trip miles, speed, top speed achieved since it was last
cleared. I clear it each night as I plug the charger in. Allows easy KwH per
days' miles calculations.
Matt Parkhouse
Colorado Springs, CO
BMW m/c-Golf Cart trike - 48 volts, 30mph on the flat, 35 mile range
1.6 cents a mile
---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tehben Dean wrote:
> OK, is the 35Ah for the lead the usable capacity or the rated
> capacity?
Real-world 100%DOD. The battery (YT) is rated 55Ah C/20 and will
deliver about 35-40Ah in EV use to 100%DOD, so about 80% is available:
28-32Ah.
> And on the 65Ah Valence batt can you discharge it to zero without
> hurting it?
That is my understanding, yes. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to
talk Valence into giving me a pack to test in my EV yet ;^>
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rush wrote:
> But I really can't afford a $26,000 pack at this point so
> I'll stay with the cheap T-125's ;-)
Yeah, I know how that goes; I'll be sticking with another $1600 pack of
YTs rather than the $13.5k Valence UEV-18XP pack, much as I'd like to
put one in my car! ;^>
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
***This was sent over 24 hours ago and the***
***original still hasn't made it to the board***
***I see Tony already sold the unit***
Sorry to hear this Tony. I hope you can find someone who wants that unit. You
said you bought it surplus, is this some place on
line? I wouldn't mind combing that location if you could send us a link.
I just bought a Vicor V300A15T500BL 500 Watt maxi module. This unit has a low
voltage cut out at 147V which should be OK for my
192V pack under normal driving conditions. For 192V pack voltage its hard to
find a Vicor unit with Min/Max specs that fall
within my operating range. I suspect that the unit to pick for 144V system
would be a VI-272-EW (or -IW for -40* temperature
rating for me). While this unit is kind of their only "dual range" unit with
brownout ~ 90V and max input to 375V, it would work
for my application but its only 100 Watt output. I need a little more than
this.
I've been watching e-bay but haven't really found a used Vicor unit that fit my
bill. I just bought mine straight from Vicor.
The V300A15T500BL I purchased was QTY 1 @ $293. They gave me quantity quotes
for 25 @ $270 ea. and 100 @ $263 ea.
I'm intending to call them back for quotes on the VI-272-EW to see how much
running 5 parallel modules would cost. They have
applications engineers that are happy to talk about how to set up and use their
products. A person could probably use their help
to design a perfect module or combination of modules to make a decent DC-DC for
EV applications. Their Bat-Mod lines can also be
set up with a crude charge algorithm. The application engineer I talked to
however said if keeping the SLI battery in an EV
properly maintained were a goal then it would be better to use their standard
DC-DC module and control it with an outboard Texas
Instruments chip that performs the charge control algorithm. I don't yet know
what chip this is, but it should be easy to locate
if one was so inclined.
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Tony Furr
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 11:42 PM
> To: EV; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: FS: Vicor DC-DC Converter
>
>
> I recently purchased a Vicor Megamod DC-DC converter (VI-26L-IU) from
> surplus in hopes of using it with my 144v system. The sales spec
> claimed "up to 300v", but the paperwork with the unit says the low-
> line is 199v and a high-line of 399v (output voltage is 28v). A call
> to Vicor support confirmed this won't work w/ my 144v system since it
> will not power on below low-line.
>
> So it won't work for me, which is a shame because this is a nice
> looking unit. It's new in the box and has never been installed. If
> anyone is interested, contact me off-list. If you're looking for a
> unit like this, you can get a great deal while helping me save the
> 15% restocking fee they will charge me for the return.
>
> tony furr
> 76 lancia scorpion EV
>
--- End Message ---
