EV Digest 6114
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
by Tehben Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: Was motor roughness - Now Raptor Issue?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Was motor roughness - Now Raptor Issue?
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Power Trailer, was EV pusher Trailer
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Power Trailer, was EV pusher Trailer
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Was motor roughness - Now Raptor Issue?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: EV controllers? the 4th option...
by "Arthur W. Matteson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: Dual outlet opportunity charging
by "Lawrence Lile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: [BULK] Re: EV pusher Trailer
by "Lawrence Lile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
by GWMobile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
by "Paschke, Stephen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Was motor roughness - Now Raptor Issue?
by "Andrew A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Sweet!
I guess they have changed battery suppliers. They were going to be
using Valence batteries at one point, It was putting valence in the
news, I wonder what happened?
The Altairnano batts sound pretty cool, 250 mile range, 95mph, 10
minute charge time.
Wonder what their vehicles will cost? $$$,$$$.$$
-Tehben
On Nov 8, 2006, at 9:17 AM, MIKE WILLMON wrote:
Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
10:00 a.m. 11/07/2006 Provided by
ONTARIO, Calif., Nov 07, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Phoenix Motorcars,
exhibiting their new zero emission, all-electric, freeway-ready
sports utility truck, received substantial media attention at the
SEMA show last week. SEMA is the Specialty Equipment Market
Association ( www.sema.org ) show attended by over 200,000
automobile industry buyers.
Phoenix Motorcars introduced a zero emission, all-electric sport
utility truck, which is powered by a revolutionary Altairnano
NanoSafe(TM) battery pack (ALTI), and the truck targets the fleet
vehicle owner market. The Phoenix Motorcars sport utility truck
exceeds all specifications for a Type III ZEV, having a driving
range of 130 miles, it can be recharged in less than 10 minutes and
the battery pack has a life of 12 years or more. Surprisingly, the
cost to recharge the battery pack is less than $3.00!!
The Phoenix Motorcars zero emission, all-electric sport utility
truck can cruise on the freeway at up to 95 mph while carrying 5
passengers and a full payload. The Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility
Truck has a low cost maintenance schedule and will be introduced in
early 2007. The Phoenix Motorcars SUV will be introduced in late
2007 with two configurations, having a range of either 130 or 250
miles and both configurations can be recharged in less than 10
minutes.
Phoenix Motorcars is receiving a solid market response with over
600 expressions of interest from fleet vehicle owners and great
press coverage with over 50 media briefings conducted in the past
week, including two press conferences held by the actor and
environmental activist Ed Begley Jr. An excellent media story was a
lead article on the Popular Mechanics website at: http://
www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4201003.html
"The Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility Trucks and Vehicles astound
people because these vehicles are full sized vehicles which carry
five people at freeway speeds, unlike the public perception of an
electric vehicle which is a golf cart sized, low speed, two
passenger vehicle. There is tremendous pent up demand for a real
zero emission, all-electric vehicle and we are well positioned to
satisfy this market demand," comments Phoenix Motorcars CEO Dan
Elliott.
Phoenix Motorcars will introduce our Sport Utility Truck for the
Fleet Vehicle Market in early 2007 and plan to produce at least 500
zero emission, all electric trucks in 2007. The SUV will be
introduced in late 2007. Vehicle orders are being taken for the
Phoenix SUT now for delivery in early 2007 and for the SUV for
delivery in late 2007, at affordable pricing.
ABOUT PHOENIX MOTORCARS, INC.
Phoenix Motorcars Inc., headquartered in Ontario, California, has
been an industry leader in the development of battery electric
freeway speed vehicles since 2001. The mission of Phoenix Motorcars
is to manufacture zero emission vehicles including Sport Utility
Trucks and Sport Utility Vehicles to reduce the toxic emissions
from the largest contributor to air pollution, personal
automobiles. For additional information visit:
www.phoenixmotorcars.com .
Phoenix Motorcars Inc.
Jana White, +1-909-987-0815
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Copyright Business Wire 2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, I have the Raptor 600. Approximately last November the
> last owner blew it and Peter (from Raptor) out in California
> repaired it and upgraded it. Maybe I haven't given it the
> love and attention it wants :)
>
> I don't have the rev limit or tach installed and haven't
> changed any settings since purchase last May.
>
> Thoughts?
The first thing I would suspect/check is connections. Perhaps
plug/unplug whatever connections are easy to do this with, and spraying
them with a bit of WD40 usually doesn't hurt either. Plug and unplug
them several times then check to see if that has eliminated the
behaviour. You might also want to cycle each of the DIP switches a few
times (making sure that they each end up back in their original state).
One of the weak spots in the Raptor is the connection between the
control board and the power stage. If cleaning/exercising the external
connections doesn't help, this is the next place to try. You'll have to
pull the controller and remove the control board to check/clean the
connector between it and the power stage.
You might also get in touch with Peter to see if there is any warranty
left on his work; May to now is only about 6mo, though if the repair was
done last Nov there's little chance of any warranty remaining.
Unfortunately, I suspect he may only offer 90 days...
Good luck,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you want to test the throttle pot,
then disconnect it and measure its resistance
from the slider to one end and to the other end,
while slowly changing the accelerator position.
Alternative if you don't have a good Ohm-meter handy
is to get a 5 kOhm potmeter (or 4.7k or 10k) that you
have lying around and wire that to the controller
temporarily, then use it (by hand) to see if you can
make the motor spin slowly.
Did you try and jack up one drive wheel to see if
it spins slowly with little throttle?
This way, you can also turn the wheel and feel
how much resistance the motor has at low throttle.
If the motor cannot spin slowly, only lurch or idle,
even with another pot, then it may indicate your
controller is missing part of its control range.
I am not familiar enough with the Raptor to know how
it translates the analog pot input into digital motor
control, but I have seen systems that need calibration
to get a linear relation; without proper calibration
they may not have a way to translate some inputs or
to generate a certain part of the range, so they go
from "off" to "20% on" or wherever the range starts
and skip the 1% .. 19% part if the calibration table
does not have these values.
Success,
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 Dave Cover
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 12:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Was motor roughness - Now Raptor Issue?
Throttle pot?
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dana and Roger,
>
> The sad news remains after some trials last night and today.
>
> symptoms better described.
> 1) If I start in 1st gear and give it some acceleration, I get past the
> roughness real quick.
> If I try to creep real slow, the truck Oscillates Lurch forward/slow down/
> lurch forward/slow down. until I accelerate better. Then it goes fine.
>
> 2) Last night I coasted to a stop with no brakes (boy that took a good 3
> minutes from 45 mph); so resistance is not a problem. The truck easily
> gains speed on a down slope and will crawl at a stop with slight incline
> and no brakes applied (even after I just applied them to stop).
>
> 3) yes motor spins by hand in neutral fine; first thing I checked
>
> 4) mechanic freed up my calipers during brake job.
>
> Perhaps a controller issue?
> Yes, I have the Raptor 600. Approximately last November the last owner
> blew it and Peter (from Raptor) out in California repaired it and upgraded
> it. Maybe I haven't given it the love and attention it wants :)
>
> I don't have the rev limit or tach installed and haven't changed any
> settings since purchase last May.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> I could install my GE-EVT15 controller (at 120 Volts to see if that works
> differently than the Raptor).
> that would be a nice day long project.
> I might even try to lower voltage to 144 just for the sake of trying it
> with the Raptor.
>
> Thanks for more help,
> where's that MadMan controller
> Ben
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Use the "WaybackMachine" at Archive.org to see how websites
looked in years past. It shows stncar.com since Dec 1996.
Last entry of 2004 still shows the full website, while
the first entry in 2005 has the placeholder.
The last full website is accessible through:
http://web.archive.org/web/20041112090818/http://www.stncar.com/
Regards,
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 David Roden
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 7:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Power Trailer, was EV pusher Trailer
On 8 Nov 2006 at 5:04, Dave Cover wrote:
> But there's always that weekend
> when you want to go visit Grandma in the next state, or take a vacation to
a
> place that 8 hours away, as I do every year. Should I drive a hybrid 51
weeks a
> year so I can take that 8 hour drive once a year? Doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure it makes any more sense to keep an APU around 51 weeks of the
year, in order to use it once. Why not rent an ICE car for that one time a
year that you need it?
I'm a sort of wistful fan of the Station Car concept. What I like about it
is not so much the idea of basing it at a train station, but the fact that
the users can take home whatever vehicles they need. Most of the time you
take home a little commuter EV. For that weekend when you want to go to
Grandma's house, take home an all-gas hybrid sedan. If you need to get some
lumber, take home a pickup. If you're going on a family vacation, take home
a minivan. Return your mini-monster the following day or week, and get back
an EV.
Here's an old article about the concept :
http://www.evworld.com/archives/conferences/naevi99/mbernard.html
Marty Barnard has been a proponent of this idea for a long time - I think I
first read his writings on station cars at least 10 years ago.
The station car concept had a website, stncar.com, for a long time (the
domain was registered in 1995). It used to be a good resource for reading
about the idea, but a year or so ago they (Marty?) took down the website and
put up a placeholder page, which is still there.
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 ---
I guess you could use an ICE for co-generation (not regen) of
electricity and heat. The advantage is that turbines run on a
wide variety of fuels, I would not want a diesel powered ICE
chugging away in the closet, but a natural gas turbine is not
too much different than the boiler with automatic ignition
that sits there today, the difference being that the turbine
will not only heat the boiler water but also makes my kWh
meter spin backwards....
I looked into pricing but the available units are for large
deployments, industrial size and would not work in residential
settings (too much hot water and loading my service to the
max in back-feeding... with the additional issue that they
are 3-phase and I have 1 phase as most houses...)
Using a capstone on a trailer will not use the heat from
the co-generation - where do you need so much hot water
in your car?
Only a little bit is needed to warm up the cabin in winter,
the rest is wasted (as usual in an ICE car).
Regards,
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 Danny Miller
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 2:11 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Power Trailer, was EV pusher Trailer
I have to ask though, are Capstones with regen any more efficient than
an ICE with regen?
Capturing waste heat is hardly rocket science. It's a heat exchanger.
I couldn't see where a Capstone was any better, in fact if I understand
correctly its exhaust temp is considerably lower than a piston ICE due
to diluting it in a greater volume of air. That would be a lower
quality heat for the Capstone, and there's somewhat less capacity to
boil water before the temp gets too low to do the work.
IIRC the Capstone with its integrated generator head was considerably
better at producing electricity from fuel than a piston generator,
though keep in mind it's not an incredibly huge difference.
When combined with controller/motor losses, there did not appear to be a
remarkable mpg gain over a vehicle's original engine, if any. There are
many variables, not the least of which is the efficiency of the
vehicle's original engine you're replacing.
The Capstone is supposed to be fairly quiet, no jet turbine noise, just
a whoosh of air (box fan?). A piston generator is extremely loud.
If you're looking for a range extender, it's not a bad choice at all
compared to a piston ICE generator. It is still bulky but fairly light
and can produce enough power to keep a sedan cruising on the highway.
Efficiency is ok and the emissions are quite acceptable.
But one must be realistic about the goals. It is doing little if any
better than the original engine for efficiency when your motive power
comes from the Capstone, you'd get far better results buying a hybrid!
Well, you could accomplish the long-sought scheme of a plug-in hybrid
and you can achieve many miles of in-town driving on plug-in power
without sacrificing the capability to go long distances. And you do get
some serious coolness factor here if you can pull off a turbine-powered car.
Capstones had an EV version, which has shown up on ebay for several
thousand dollars in the past. There was a fleet of city buses powered
by these things that got scrapped and I think that was the major
source. However the supply seems to have mostly dried up.
Danny
Cor van de Water wrote:
>NOTE that micro-turbines like the Capstone are
>typically promoted (with good reason) to be co-gen units.
>
>They generate heat AND electricity, which increases their
>total efficiency if you need pretty constant heat, like
>in a hospital, industrial process, ... and you can use or
>sell the electricity.
>They can meet or beat power plant's efficiency and I hope
>also emissions, which are the reasons most of us do this.
>Use a turbine in a car iso ICE is almost never efficient
>and has unrelated drawbacks, as you indicated.
>
>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 Danny Miller
>Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 9:42 PM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: Power Trailer, was EV pusher Trailer
>
>
>There is a point to the design if you want to try a radically different
>power source like a Capstone Microturbine. They are supposed to have
>good emissions and are fairly efficient at producing electricity with an
>integrated DC generator head. However, the calculations I recall doing
>some time ago suggested similar mpg to the original engine of an
>"average" vehicle. Perhaps a bit better, on the order of maybe 20%, but
>it was hard to say.
>
>Ordinary generators, I have stated the same case as David on multiple
>occasions. It will end up at best a bit poorer mpg (depends on what
>vehicle you compare it to), and terrible emissions. It matters not
>whether you want to use the gen to charge the batteries slowly while
>parked or a big one to provide the motive power as you drive. At best,
>if you make the case that using it 10% of the time makes the EV
>practical and otherwise you wouldn't own an EV, there's sort of a value
>in terms of fossil fuel consumption. In terms of pollution it's way
>worse even if only a very minor portion of your driving is done off of
>generator power.
>
>Another note was that generators are inherently VERY loud. Adding a car
>muffler to the exhaust has significant value, but exhaust noise is only
>a portion of the problem.
>
>Danny
>
>David Roden wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 6 Nov 2006 at 20:31, Roland Wiench wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>There is another way to use a EV Trailer, is to have a engine generator
>>>
>>>
>with
>
>
>>>enough power to drive the EV motor by itself ... It did 22.5 mpg ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>This scheme and its variants has been discussed quite frequently on this
>>list. It's very similar to what many EV neophytes hope to do with an APU.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>But while such a machine may indeed be suited to driving an EV cross
>>country, it has some downsides for routine use.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Cor van de Water wrote:
> If you want to test the throttle pot,
> then disconnect it and measure its resistance
> from the slider to one end and to the other end,
> while slowly changing the accelerator position.
Good advice, but not applicable to Ben's situation: the DCP controllers
don't use throttle pots, they use an inductive sensor (the throttle
cable pulls a metal slug inside a coil). No contacts to wear or get
dirty. ;^>
> If the motor cannot spin slowly, only lurch or idle,
> even with another pot, then it may indicate your
> controller is missing part of its control range.
> I am not familiar enough with the Raptor to know how
> it translates the analog pot input into digital motor
> control, but I have seen systems that need calibration
> to get a linear relation; without proper calibration
> they may not have a way to translate some inputs or
> to generate a certain part of the range, so they go
> from "off" to "20% on" or wherever the range starts
> and skip the 1% .. 19% part if the calibration table
> does not have these values.
The Raptor does have the ability to be configured/calibrated for both
idle and wide-open throttle positions, so it might not be a bad idea to
go through this just to ensure things are still setup properly (though I
seriously doubt this is the problem).
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I'm assuming your ambient air temperature really is 121 deg.F, as it
> would be in the Arizona summer sun. I'm aiming for the worst-case
> situation, not the typical or best-case.
You said "heatsink temperature" to begin with. This, then, changes the
calculations.
We should be choosing the heatsink to suit the module, not the module to
suit the heatsink. If a 600V part were used, the loss would be lower.
These "marketing figures" are not always best-case. In our situation,
Powerex [Mitsubishi] rates the thermal resistances at a worst-case
value. The switching times are also listed at a worst-case value.
Although many parameters are listed at 25*C junction, some of them get
better with higher temperature (saturation voltage). International
Rectifier clearly displays only the worst-case on-resistance of its
MOSFETs, leaving the typical value to be found farther down in the
datasheet. The voltage ratings of its MOSFETs are also worst-case
values; I'm now putting 40V across a 20V part to do some dissipation
testing. Do you consider this trying to be manipulative? I don't see
that marketing people are so evil - I actually find many of the ratings
to be quite honest.
Let's consider an IGBT suited for the situation: the CM600HU-12F. It's
rated for 600V. At worst case, the forward drop is 2.2V at 600A and
25*C. Let's go with the worst kind of heatsink, the 0.15*C/W one I
listed. And let's start with the worst ambient temperature of 50*C, and
limit the junction to 100*C.
Power = 50*C / (0.258*C/W) = 194W
Current = 194W / 1.38V = 140A
The 1.38V has been determined by taking the ratio between the maximum
and nominal voltages at 25*C, 600A, and multiplying them by the
appropriate drop at 100*C, 140A (guess and check).
Now you're probably going to bring up switching loss, and say that my
value is way off considering it. Disclaimer: 140A does not include
switching loss. But this is why I don't like modules; they're too
lossy! And you don't *always* need to switch.
So even with an undersized heatsink in the middle of a bad summer, you
can still get 140A out of the thing. What I would do if I were building
the controller is limit the current based on the heatsink temperature.
That way, you aren't totally wasting the part. I would also choose a
heatsink that is *appropriate* to the situation. Obviously this one is
too small. A two-fan unit would be a better choice, allowing as much as
400A instantaneously in some situations (it should be the controller's
job to find out when). A temporary acceleration boost could be useful,
and the thermal masses allow it.
> The key point is that you can't blindly accept the advertised ratings.
> They are wildly optimistic! Even the "mizzible Cursit" controller that
> everyone complains about uses 35 BUZ30A 200v 21a MOSFETs for a 72-120v
> 400a controller. These parts would imply a 35 x 21a = 735a rating; but
> they only get about half of this, and only with the controller stone cold.
Part of this reason is switching loss, as you've mentioned elsewhere.
Perhaps with a better snubber/heatsink design, they could improve this
figure. The MOSFETs I used for my DC car were rated for 1080A total; I
got about 900A through them for a few seconds in the summer (without any
bus capacitance!). I blew up a battery terminal, but the controller was
fine. Besides, the BUZ30A parts are slow and have a large
on-resistance. The comparable IRFB260Ns I now use to power my AC car
have over three times less (and they aren't terribly expensive either).
Imagine someone owning a pet (e.g. a dog or cat), and only feeding it
when it was absolutely starving. Also imagine them not taking it to the
vet when needed. The owner could complain when the pet wouldn't want to
go out to play, was violent around people, and was sour all of the time,
and could ask why the animal was acting so horribly.
If this were my neighbor, I would tell them that there was nothing wrong
with the pet, but that these results were the consequences of them not
taking care of it properly. The owner would then argue that caring for
the pet wasn't in their budget for money, time, or space. I would
retaliate by telling the owner that they weren't trying hard enough. I
would suggest to them that pet food can conveniently be bought along
with human food, and I would also give them information about new types
of medicine to help keep it healthy. I would assist the owner in
choosing a proper space for the pet that would help "show it a little
love." I would hope that they'd realize that although it might not
necessarily be easy to figure out how to care for the animal, it would
be well worth the effort, as shown by the great success I'd had with my
own pet.
This example is demonstrating the difference between pessimism and
optimism. I'll leave it up to readers to "translate" the story to apply
to transistors or EVs - I've written it so that everything correlates.
In short, if you treat the IGBT properly, and have motivation along with
a positive attitude about getting high currents through it - even if
this means making some compromises, like summer vs. winter - you'll
succeed.
- Arthur
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>I was wondering if I could connect each outlet to a
separate diode bridge and then parallel the output for
my 120v dc battery pack. (Take the +168v from each
bridge and each -168v from each bridge, and applying
them to my batteries).
>Can that work?
It'd work OK as long as the two outlets happened to be from the same leg
of the panelboard. If they are on two different legs of a 240V or 208V
circuit, then I'm not sure what would happen but I believe it might
involve sparks.
Lawrence Lile,
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of mike golub
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 1:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Dual outlet opportunity charging
First, all the outlets for block heaters here in
Fairbanks, AK are on 20 amp breakers.
Sometimes I'll park somewhere, and I can have access
to two 20 amp outlets.
I was wondering if I could connect each outlet to a
separate diode bridge and then parallel the output for
my 120v dc battery pack. (Take the +168v from each
bridge and each -168v from each bridge, and applying
them to my batteries).
Can that work?
thanks,
Michael
________________________________________________________________________
__________________
Sponsored Link
Talk more and pay less. Vonage can save you up to $300 a year on your
phone bill.
Sign up now. http://www.vonage.com/startsavingnow/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, the Bike Pusher idea occurred to me, too.
I've been involved with bicycles (A 3-wheel recumbent to be exact) where
my friend strapped on two car batteries and a 1/2 HP tire drive motor
and away he went. The motor was bought from Burden's surplus, the
batteries were junk car batteries. He broke a lot of spokes, from
adding two heavy batteries and his own, not insubstantial, weight to the
bike. As you might have guessed, it was a very poorly designed hack,
however quite worthy as an experiment. I think he kept the thing
running that way for about a year. I really like to do first pass
experiments with a new technology, on the cheap, to fin the largest
scale problems, before making a more refined prototype.
A one wheel bike trailer is quite practical for carrying a hefty load,
either a commercial one a homebuilt one. I'm trying to imagine how much
range and speed would be a practical amount to add.
My area is generally flat, punctuated by occasional steep hills.
15-20MPH is a reasonable average on the flats, 3-4 MPH on the uphills,
and the average goes down to 8-9 MPH. Just getting a boost up the hills
could almost double the average speed.
The problems cited for the EV pusher are the same with the bike trailer,
except the scale is minimized to a very practical problem. Yes, you
have weight but it isn't a showstopper if the bike pusher can add torque
up a steep hill.
Lawrence Lile,
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Humphrey
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 10:44 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [BULK] Re: EV pusher Trailer
Importance: Low
Pete,
I agree that the EV pusher trailer is a bad idea. But not because of the
fuel mileage that you suggest. Most trailers that I've towed have
resulted
in less than 1 or 2 mpg loss. And that is with heavy trailers up over my
cab
pushing the wind. Some trailers (lower profile) have actually IMPROVED
my
mileage even while loaded.
However I still believe an Electric pusher is a bad idea. Especially if
it
is to be used only occasionally, which I believe it would. The batteries
will die of old age before they get any use.
However, having said all that, I am contemplating building one for my
bicycle (13 mi each way to work).
Bikes and cars are completely different in this aspect though....
--
Stay Charged!
Hump
GE I-5
Blossvale, NY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Peter VanDerWal
> Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 9:19 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: EV pusher Trailer
>
> Are you all STILL talking about electric pushers? Sorry to burst your
> bubble, but this is just a plain bad idea.
>
> It takes about 600lbs of lead-acid batteries to get the same range as
one
> gallon of gasoline. Because EVs only carry the equivelent of one to
three
> gallons of gasoline, they HAVE to be efficient. An electric pusher
simply
> isn't efficient.
> Let's assume we try a small electric pusher with only 600lbs of
batteries,
> 100+ lbs of motor, 75-100lbs of tranmission, 25-50 lbs of controller,
> circuit breakers, cables, etc. plus the weight of the trailer and we
are
> talking about 1,2000 lbs, maybe more.
> Now let's assume we have a car with average fuel economy, approx 27
mpg.
> What does it's fuel economy drop to when pulling a 1,200 lb trailer?
> 19-20mpg, maybe worse?
> So you spend thousands to get a vehicle that can only get you 10 miles
> before you have to return, or you put up with poor fuel economy when
you
go
> further. Plus you have to put up with hualing a trailer around town.
> You can make the trailer heavier, but you are looking at diminishing
> returns, then next 600 lbs gets you maybe 15 miles and so forth. Plus
it's
> too heavy for a small car to hual (most passenger vehicles only have a
1,000
> towing capacity or less.)
>
> Spend the money on a used hybrid, you're far better off. Buy an old
Prius
> and you can convert it to a plug in hybrid and get the same electric
range
> as above and WAY BETTER fuel economy when you run out of juice.
>
> Or get a SECOND car and convert it to electric. You'll have lower
costs
and
> a lot less work than making a pusher trailer and much better range and
> efficiency.
>
> ICE pushers make a certain sense for some situations. ELectric
pushers
> don't really make any sense.
>
> > I can see how pushing a car on the highway would work, but if you
had
> > an electric pusher pushing an ICE car around town, it seems like
it
> > might be a little awkward say.. doing a right angle turn from a
> > stoplight? especially if you have a light vehicle. ...maybe if
you
> > accelerate very slowly?
> > Anyone have experience in this situation?
> >
> > Just throwing that out there.
> >
> > -Tehben
> >
> >
> > On Nov 6, 2006, at 11:41 AM, Michael wrote:
> >
> >>> The forward pressure on the tongue when operating in
pusher
mode is
> >>> relatively small compared to the forward pressure in
braking
mode.
> >>> That
> >>> should pretty well negate concern about the switch and
the
concern
> >>> about the hitch operating backwards from its design. The
amount of
> >>> force generated on the hitch by your pusher is
insignificant
> >>> compared to stopping a 5000 pound trailer. Compare your
0-60
time
> >>> with your 60-0 time.
> >>> F=MA
> >>
> >> That is very true. My concern was that all the weight was
negative...
> >> lifting the hitch off the ball. (Braking power shoves the
hitch
> >> *down* on
> >> the ball & only a small amount of that force is taken by
the
locking
> >> tongue.)
> >>
> >> Driving w/ a hitch would be lifting, so perhaps it'd be wise
to
> >> balance the trailer with a bit more weight on the tonge than
you'd
> >> normall use.
> >>
> >> For one of our utility trailers, we also used a couple short
chains.
> >> Thus, even if the tongue unlatched itself, the chains would
keep
the
> >> hitch from lifting completely off the ball. (My boss started
doing
> >> that when a new hitch tongue broke and a trailer/bulldozer
tried
to
> >> drive over the top of his PU. <g>)
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
__________________________________________________________________
http://www.evsource.com - Professional EV components and resources
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why haven't we heard of this battery technology before?
That's astounding and the 10 minute charge changes EVERYTHING.
Range isn't a problem if you can recharge in 10 minutes. That is less
than the time it takes to fill a gas tank!
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 12:43 pm, Tehben Dean wrote:
Sweet!
I guess they have changed battery suppliers. They were going to be
using Valence batteries at one point, It was putting valence in the
news, I wonder what happened?
The Altairnano batts sound pretty cool, 250 mile range, 95mph, 10
minute charge time.
Wonder what their vehicles will cost? $$$,$$$.$$
-Tehben
On Nov 8, 2006, at 9:17 AM, MIKE WILLMON wrote:
Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
10:00 a.m. 11/07/2006 Provided by
ONTARIO, Calif., Nov 07, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Phoenix Motorcars,
exhibiting their new zero emission, all-electric, freeway-ready
sports utility truck, received substantial media attention at the
SEMA show last week. SEMA is the Specialty Equipment Market
Association ( www.sema.org ) show attended by over 200,000 automobile
industry buyers.
Phoenix Motorcars introduced a zero emission, all-electric sport
utility truck, which is powered by a revolutionary Altairnano
NanoSafe(TM) battery pack (ALTI), and the truck targets the fleet
vehicle owner market. The Phoenix Motorcars sport utility truck
exceeds all specifications for a Type III ZEV, having a driving range
of 130 miles, it can be recharged in less than 10 minutes and the
battery pack has a life of 12 years or more. Surprisingly, the cost
to recharge the battery pack is less than $3.00!!
The Phoenix Motorcars zero emission, all-electric sport utility truck
can cruise on the freeway at up to 95 mph while carrying 5 passengers
and a full payload. The Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility Truck has a
low cost maintenance schedule and will be introduced in early 2007.
The Phoenix Motorcars SUV will be introduced in late 2007 with two
configurations, having a range of either 130 or 250 miles and both
configurations can be recharged in less than 10 minutes.
Phoenix Motorcars is receiving a solid market response with over 600
expressions of interest from fleet vehicle owners and great press
coverage with over 50 media briefings conducted in the past week,
including two press conferences held by the actor and environmental
activist Ed Begley Jr. An excellent media story was a lead article on
the Popular Mechanics website at: http://
www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4201003.html
"The Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility Trucks and Vehicles astound
people because these vehicles are full sized vehicles which carry
five people at freeway speeds, unlike the public perception of an
electric vehicle which is a golf cart sized, low speed, two passenger
vehicle. There is tremendous pent up demand for a real zero emission,
all-electric vehicle and we are well positioned to satisfy this
market demand," comments Phoenix Motorcars CEO Dan Elliott.
Phoenix Motorcars will introduce our Sport Utility Truck for the
Fleet Vehicle Market in early 2007 and plan to produce at least 500
zero emission, all electric trucks in 2007. The SUV will be
introduced in late 2007. Vehicle orders are being taken for the
Phoenix SUT now for delivery in early 2007 and for the SUV for
delivery in late 2007, at affordable pricing.
ABOUT PHOENIX MOTORCARS, INC.
Phoenix Motorcars Inc., headquartered in Ontario, California, has
been an industry leader in the development of battery electric
freeway speed vehicles since 2001. The mission of Phoenix Motorcars
is to manufacture zero emission vehicles including Sport Utility
Trucks and Sport Utility Vehicles to reduce the toxic emissions from
the largest contributor to air pollution, personal automobiles. For
additional information visit: www.phoenixmotorcars.com .
Phoenix Motorcars Inc.
Jana White, +1-909-987-0815
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Copyright Business Wire 2006
www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily images about hurricanes, globalwarming
and the melting poles.
www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake images.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Look back through the archives at subjects on Ceramic and NanoTech batteries.
Here's another press release about:
Altairnano Demonstrates Excellent Battery Performance at SEMA Show
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/061107/20061107005720.html?.v=1
The detail not mentioned is $$$,$$$.$$
I didn't read the above referenced subjects enough and pricing may have been
mentioned.
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
----- Original Message -----
From: GWMobile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, November 8, 2006 1:24 pm
Subject: Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Why haven't we heard of this battery technology before?
> That's astounding and the 10 minute charge changes EVERYTHING.
> Range isn't a problem if you can recharge in 10 minutes. That is
> less
> than the time it takes to fill a gas tank!
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We heard about this on this list in a press release a few months ago.
There was a lot of "I'll believe it when I see it."
I still say prove it. I'm sure that is not a full charge. Maybe 80% or
the top 5%?
Remember they said "as little as".
> Stephen Paschke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of GWMobile
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 2:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
Why haven't we heard of this battery technology before?
That's astounding and the 10 minute charge changes EVERYTHING.
Range isn't a problem if you can recharge in 10 minutes. That is less
than the time it takes to fill a gas tank!
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 12:43 pm, Tehben Dean wrote:
> Sweet!
> I guess they have changed battery suppliers. They were going to be
> using Valence batteries at one point, It was putting valence in the
> news, I wonder what happened?
> The Altairnano batts sound pretty cool, 250 mile range, 95mph, 10
> minute charge time.
> Wonder what their vehicles will cost? $$$,$$$.$$
>
> -Tehben
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2006, at 9:17 AM, MIKE WILLMON wrote:
>
>> Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
>>
>> 10:00 a.m. 11/07/2006 Provided by
>>
>>
>> ONTARIO, Calif., Nov 07, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Phoenix Motorcars,
>> exhibiting their new zero emission, all-electric, freeway-ready
>> sports utility truck, received substantial media attention at the
>> SEMA show last week. SEMA is the Specialty Equipment Market
>> Association ( www.sema.org ) show attended by over 200,000
automobile
>> industry buyers.
>>
>> Phoenix Motorcars introduced a zero emission, all-electric sport
>> utility truck, which is powered by a revolutionary Altairnano
>> NanoSafe(TM) battery pack (ALTI), and the truck targets the fleet
>> vehicle owner market. The Phoenix Motorcars sport utility truck
>> exceeds all specifications for a Type III ZEV, having a driving
range
>> of 130 miles, it can be recharged in less than 10 minutes and the
>> battery pack has a life of 12 years or more. Surprisingly, the cost
>> to recharge the battery pack is less than $3.00!!
>>
>> The Phoenix Motorcars zero emission, all-electric sport utility
truck
>> can cruise on the freeway at up to 95 mph while carrying 5
passengers
>> and a full payload. The Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility Truck has a
>> low cost maintenance schedule and will be introduced in early 2007.
>> The Phoenix Motorcars SUV will be introduced in late 2007 with two
>> configurations, having a range of either 130 or 250 miles and both
>> configurations can be recharged in less than 10 minutes.
>>
>> Phoenix Motorcars is receiving a solid market response with over 600
>> expressions of interest from fleet vehicle owners and great press
>> coverage with over 50 media briefings conducted in the past week,
>> including two press conferences held by the actor and environmental
>> activist Ed Begley Jr. An excellent media story was a lead article
on
>> the Popular Mechanics website at: http://
>> www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4201003.html
>>
>> "The Phoenix Motorcars Sport Utility Trucks and Vehicles astound
>> people because these vehicles are full sized vehicles which carry
>> five people at freeway speeds, unlike the public perception of an
>> electric vehicle which is a golf cart sized, low speed, two
passenger
>> vehicle. There is tremendous pent up demand for a real zero
emission,
>> all-electric vehicle and we are well positioned to satisfy this
>> market demand," comments Phoenix Motorcars CEO Dan Elliott.
>>
>> Phoenix Motorcars will introduce our Sport Utility Truck for the
>> Fleet Vehicle Market in early 2007 and plan to produce at least 500
>> zero emission, all electric trucks in 2007. The SUV will be
>> introduced in late 2007. Vehicle orders are being taken for the
>> Phoenix SUT now for delivery in early 2007 and for the SUV for
>> delivery in late 2007, at affordable pricing.
>>
>> ABOUT PHOENIX MOTORCARS, INC.
>>
>> Phoenix Motorcars Inc., headquartered in Ontario, California, has
>> been an industry leader in the development of battery electric
>> freeway speed vehicles since 2001. The mission of Phoenix Motorcars
>> is to manufacture zero emission vehicles including Sport Utility
>> Trucks and Sport Utility Vehicles to reduce the toxic emissions from
>> the largest contributor to air pollution, personal automobiles. For
>> additional information visit: www.phoenixmotorcars.com .
>>
>>
>> Phoenix Motorcars Inc.
>> Jana White, +1-909-987-0815
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Copyright Business Wire 2006
>>
www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily images about hurricanes, globalwarming
and the melting poles.
www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake images.
**************************************************************
This message, including any attachments, contains confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If
you are not the intended recipient, please contact sender immediately by reply
e-mail and destroy all copies. You are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on
it, is strictly prohibited.
TIAA-CREF
**************************************************************
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is there any chance that throttle ramping could affect
this in any way? Since nobody else had brought it up
yet, I figured I might as well.
I'm a newbie who doesn't have a working EV (yet), so
my suggestions shouldn't be taken too seriously.
Good luck!
Andrew
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> symptoms better described.
> 1) If I start in 1st gear and give it some
> acceleration, I get past the
> roughness real quick.
> If I try to creep real slow, the truck Oscillates
> Lurch forward/slow down/
> lurch forward/slow down. until I accelerate better.
> Then it goes fine.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link
Get an Online or Campus degree
Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's - in less than one year.
http://www.findtherightschool.com
--- End Message ---
