EV Digest 6119
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Carbon Dioxide and EVs - a loser?
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Fox News falls for Steorn
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Solar EV power
by "Ev Performance (Robert Chew)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Solar EV power can work
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Carbon Dioxide and EVs - a loser?
by "ohnojoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Multiple NEDRA records
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Multiple NEDRA Records and Production Class
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
9) Re: Solar EV power
by Storm Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Multiple NEDRA records
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Re: Renewable Energy Idea, an' More!
by Storm Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Multiple NEDRA records
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
13) Re: Multiple NEDRA records
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) Re: Multiple NEDRA Records and Production Class
by "BFRListmail" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
There are also plans to "sequester" the CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
power plants. If this is for real, then fossil fuel power plant
emissions are near zero while automotive gasoline remains unchanged.
However, the practice of sequestering is not currently widespread and
there are serious questions as to whether the basic principle is
scientifically valid or merely an industrial scam to circumvent
environmental regulations.
Danny
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These figures p[roably are correct, but are a worse case scenario and don't
take several other factors into account.....there is no age to the figures,
and due to the fact that , presumably, the US is slowly inmplementing a
renweable energy policy the lb/kwh for 'US Power' is going to be continually
reducing....add to that the fact that more coal fired stations are being converted
to run on gas, or they at least should be, this figure for CO2 from US Power
is one that Americans should not necessarily dispute but instead hold it up
to the governemnt declaring it to be disgraceful.........and be careful that
they don't start taxing you for CO2 production
Re: Carbon Dioxide and EVs - a loser?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) >
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Without quoting accurate sources for all the numbers given, blogs like
this are just one more persons unsubstantiated opinion.
Mike
"A electric car charging from a coal powered grid ( 2.177 lbs C02/kwh)
would generate twice the C02 per mile over a new low emissions IC car.
If you lived in a nuclear or wind / hydro generated area a grid charged
EV car would generate 10 times less C02 per mile then in a coal powered
area and 1/5 the C02 of a IC vehicle."
"These high C02 numbers for a EV were a complete surprise to me.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
reminds me of the people that suggest putting windmills on electric cars so
you can produce the electricity to run the car 0-o
That actually works on boats. Shouldn't be any different on a car. It's
just that the windmill big enough to do the job would probably tip over the
car. Lawrence Rhodes......
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
who are u addressing this to?
On 10/11/06, Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Your figures don't tell the real story.
A panel rate dto produce 150 watts is rated to produce them while cool, at
high noon, in the middle of summer, in Arizona, while pointed directly at
the sun.
The main problems are: the panel heats up when exposed to the sun, so
power drops. High noon only occures for a brief period of time, as the
sun moves power drops. As you move away from the middle of the year, power
drops. If you live further north, power drops. If the panel isn't
pointed directly at the sun, power drops.
Now the panel manufacturer knows all of this, so they compensate for it.
A panel designed to charge a 12V battery normally produces max power at
around 17 volts or so. However, the panel's rating assumes it will be
outputing 17 volts.
When you hook it up to a battery, the battery pulls the voltage down. The
current goes up a tiny bit, but not enough to maintain the rated power.
It might be rated to produce 8.8 amps at 17V, but you will only get maybe
9 amps at 13V.
So even if you have a cool panel, at high noon, etc. it doesn't produce
150 watts, it produces 13V * 9A (give or take) = 117 Watts, and this is
BEFORE you start loosing power for not pointing directly at the sun, not
being noon, not living in Arizona, etc. etc. etc.
So if you get 5 hours of sun, you don't EVER get 5 * 150 watts, you get
maybe 1/2 of that. That of course assumes you have them on a stationary
mount poinrting more or less towards the noon sun. Mount the panel on the
top of you vehicle, and you'll get even less.
Run you output through a DC-DC converter to charge the vehicle, and you'll
get even less.
You can overcome a few of these problems.
You compensate for the voltage difference between the panel and the
battery by using a MPPT, basically a DC-DC converter that tries to keep
the panel producing near is maximum output.
If you have the panels on a fixed mount, you can also add a sun tracker to
keep the panels pointed at the sun.
However even if you combine both of these options, you won't see full
rated output. Also both of these options are somewhat expensive, in fact
it's usually cheaper just to buy more panels.
> I drive off of solar power. Indirectly. 21 panels on my roof at home
> spinning my meter backwards. Hey another rule of thumb, that is about 1
> panel per battery in my EV.
> I have created enough power in one year to drive 14,000 miles in an EV
> at 300wh/mile.
>
> Put the panels on the roof of the house. or...How about asking your
> employer if you can put up a shaded "carport" for your car. Get 4 panels
> on that thing and plug your car in. Now you park in the shade and your
> pack is healthier if not recharged.
>
>
> Lets do a little math. (Assume 300wh/mile)
> The sun hits the earth with a 1000W / sq meter (this is called 1 sun)
> panels are about 17% effient so about 150W /panel
> So if a panel sat in full sun for 2 hours, I could drive 1 more mile.
>
> If I could get 2 sq meters for 300w(but it needs to face the sun)
> ("Excuse me sir, I'll be right back, i gotta go re-position my car?"), I
> can get a mile for every hour parked. Now even in the central valley we
> have a rating if 5 full sun hours a day. So... 5 mile to work and all
> sunny days and you got it.
>
>
--
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 ---
Ok Rich. I just mentioned smaller because I'm cheap. The ultimate would be
your largest charger on a custom electric scooter. A pack of about 100
pounds & a place of honor the PFC 50/bigger. You could charge awful quick &
if you had good aero you would have a 100 mile range & a full charge in
minutes. Lawrence Rhodes.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
> What??
> Smaller pack LARGER charger!!
>
> Madman
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 1:34 AM
> Subject: Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
>
>
> > The other advantage of quick charging is a smaller charger & pack. You
> will
> > save on battery cost. Lawrence Rhodes.......
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 5:16 PM
> > Subject: Re: Phoenix Motorcars Takes SEMA Show by Storm
> >
> >
> > > The PDF data sheet indicates 10 minutes to 90%.
> > >
> > > http://www.altairnano.com/documents/060926HOUSECARBZEV.pdf
> > >
> > > Ken
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 11/8/2006 5:56:06 PM Central Standard Time,
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > Good point.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 2:52 pm, Paschke, Stephen wrote:
> > > > 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]
> > >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Robert, Peter and All,
Cool set up Robert.
To make solar EV's work, EVer's will like you
have to go to lighter EV's. As most here have leadmine
conversions, they can't reasonably do it except for a soilar
carport.
Let's take a look at a better choice like my
1500lb, low drag built as an EV which really is the only way
to judge.
It has 40sq' of roof, hood that can be used.
Using Peter's. others eff figures, lets say 100wt/sq'm. That
gives about 400wt/hr in full, noon sun into the batteries.
Most area's get between 4 and 8 hrs of full
sun worth of light each day for a fixed angle system, not
tracking.
Let's take the middle of that range, 6 hrs
x's 400wts is 2.4kw.
My EV should get about 60wthr/mile at 40 mph
and 120wthr/mile at 65 mph projected. Let's take 55 mph at
100wthrs/mile as a good number.
With 100wthr/mile and 2.4 kw available each
day would get mine about 24 mpd at 55 mph!!
Using a smaller batt pack, 50 miles worth
instead of 100 miles range, would increase solar range even
more from less rolling drag.
One could build a 500 lb solar car with the
same surface area and go farther, faster if one wanted to as
solar racers did about 400mpd?
For many people, this could easily work so
stop saying it won't, instead show those how it can work.
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "Ev Performance (Robert Chew)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Solar EV power
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 13:46:21 +1100
>The little fiat with solar panel belongs to me.
>
>The top speed of the vehicle is low,and my driving
>conditions is low seed, below 60 km/hr so drag is not such
>a huge consideration.
>
>And also from a full days charging, i use my homebuilt
>boost dc dc convertor to step up the voltage of my panels
>to nominal 72.
>
>I get around 4kms.
>
>My car does from the batteries, 130-150wh /km (not AC). I
>have 3 lots of 55 watt suntech modules on the vehicle. Over
>here in downuner, there is plenty of sun.
>
>that 4km's is more than the distance i drive everyday from
>my home to the shopping center where i park to catch a
>train (3km's). ALthough it is great to be able to plug my
>car in with the installed electric vehicle charging bay
>that the shopping center as kind enough to install.
>
>Solar panels on cars depends on individual situation. I
>personally think it is ideal to have a grid connected
>system at home supplying power to the grid and then use the
>grid to charge the car. But hey, solar panels on cars make
>it look cool and futuristic!
>
>Cheers
>
>
>On 10/11/06, Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Sure, if you only drove it 15 miles or less once a week.
>>
>> Of course if you only go somewhere once a week, it might
>> be cheaper to take a cab.
>>
>> > If you only drove the car every few days couldn't it
>> > completely recharge it?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 12:42 pm, Michael wrote:
>> >>> A little Fiat with a solar panel on top. Maybe you
>> >>> could ask his how he
>> >>> did it. Christie
>> >>
>> >> I'd ask why he bothered. <vbg> Though I suppose an
>> >> extra mile a day could
>> >> be worthwhile.
>> >
>> > www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily images about hurricanes
>> > , globalwarming and the melting poles.
>> >
>> > www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake
>> >images.
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 ---
Here is the info from eaaev.
http://www.eaaev.org/Forms-Docs/eaaflyer-autoemissions.pdf
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 1:50 AM
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide and EVs - a loser?
These figures p[roably are correct, but are a worse case scenario and
don't
take several other factors into account.....there is no age to the
figures,
and due to the fact that , presumably, the US is slowly inmplementing a
renweable energy policy the lb/kwh for 'US Power' is going to be
continually
reducing....add to that the fact that more coal fired stations are being
converted
to run on gas, or they at least should be, this figure for CO2 from US
Power
is one that Americans should not necessarily dispute but instead hold it
up
to the governemnt declaring it to be disgraceful.........and be careful
that
they don't start taxing you for CO2 production
Re: Carbon Dioxide and EVs - a loser?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) >
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Without quoting accurate sources for all the numbers given, blogs like
this are just one more persons unsubstantiated opinion.
Mike
"A electric car charging from a coal powered grid ( 2.177 lbs C02/kwh)
would generate twice the C02 per mile over a new low emissions IC car.
If you lived in a nuclear or wind / hydro generated area a grid charged
EV car would generate 10 times less C02 per mile then in a coal powered
area and 1/5 the C02 of a IC vehicle."
"These high C02 numbers for a EV were a complete surprise to me.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was just perusing the NEDRA sight and realized a current trend. A
few vehicles are switching voltages up and down and gobbling up alot
of the records. I understand in a free world to the victor goes the
spoils but it makes me kinda sad. Are there any NEDRA limitations to
how many voltage classes can be held by one vehicle?
There's really no limitation to how many records one can hold with a
particular vehicle, other than the same day rule which prohibits
changing voltage classes during same day races. The tone of your post
seems to be, that you do not think its very sportsmanlike for someone
with a hot EV to purposefully pull batteries-lowering the power level
but also lightening the vehicle, then establishing records in other
voltage classes. I agree with this mindset.
I could pull 14 of the 30 batteries from White Zombie which would
lighten it by 343 lbs. and drop its voltage to 192V, then compete in the
'C' voltage class. The car would probably run a high 13. I won't do
this though, because of two reasons.... (1) I do not feel it's good
sportsmanship (2) My goal is to keep making the car as quick and fast as
it can possibly be.
I've always kept my focus on ever-increasing my car's performance rather
than seeing how many different class records I could capture. There's
only been one time where I went from a higher voltage down to a lower
voltage and captured a record, and that was dictated purely by the
battery sponsorship offered to me at the time. When Exide first
approached me about running 40 lb. Orbitals, I passed on the idea,
telling them that to hit the 300V+ level would require far too much
volume and weight in batteries. I instead, kept the voltage at 336V when
I selected 28 of their 26 lb. import line called 'Power Fit' - Hawker
sized batteries that didn't even come close to Hawker performance. The
728 lb. pack proved to be a total disaster at the track, blowing up with
currents as low a 500 amps. When the small import batteries didn't work
out, Exide was still eager to provide Orbitals. I reluctantly went with
heavy 40 lb. batteries for the '04 racing season. The sheer weight of
each Orbital meant I had to lower the pack voltage to keep the maximum
pack weight to my established ~ 700 lb. limit. Thus, 18 of them weighed
720 lbs. and dropped the pack voltage down to 216V. The 216V car
initially only ran 15's, but after lots of tweaking to take advantage of
the HUGE currents these batteries could dish out - adding two more
batteries for 240V and my 'Afterburner Bypass', I squeezed a 12.99 ET
from the car.
With the above exception, from '94 to present, White Zombie always went
higher in voltage as I pushed the car's performance. In '94 it was at
175V, in '96 it was at 180V, in '97 it was at 240V, then from '98 - 2002
it was at 336V. The peak of performance with the light weight 336V pack
came in May of 2000 with a 13.1 ET. In 2003 with an aging and tired 336V
battery pack and ETs progressively getting slower, to keep the car
somewhat competitive I ran the car up to 408V just for the '03 Woodburn
drags, when as a last minute idea I added a 72V Hawker booster pack to
the tired 336V pack and managed to pull a 13.55 ET. In 2004 as already
described, the small and tired 378 lb. 336V pack was replaced with the
heavier Power Fit Exides, then after that didn't pan out, the change to
even larger and heavier Orbital batteries forced going down to 216V.
That pack grew to 240V. In 2005 with new sponsorship from Aerobatteries
and Hawker, I returned to my high voltage ways. A new 710 lb. 348V pack
of 29, 24.5 lb. Hawker Aerobatteries went in and the ETs went so deep
into the 12's we were smelling the 11's! In search of those 11's, the
pack then went up to its present 360V level with 30 batteries at 735 lbs.
From Dennis Berube:
you will not see me doing this,I do not think it fair
to upcoming competitors.
It appears that in regards to dropping to lower voltage classes purely
to claim new records, Dennis feels the same way as Shawn and I do.
More from Dennis Berube:
To race in the SC class however one canot have
a rear end other than the stock housing. I did not read all the rules however
before I built the S10,so I did put in a 9in.ford already. So I assume (if I
join nedra again in the future)that I will be in the pro street class. After
reading about the current SC class record holders its come to my attention that
they may indeed also have 9in ford rears. So my question to nedra, can the rules be
bent? And how much?
Dennis, I believe I found what 'came to your attention'. I hadn't gone
to the NEDRA records page for some time, but after reading your comments
about 'bending rules' I took a look. I was surprised to find that White
Zombie's 12.308 @ 104.20 mph run from the August Late Night NEDRA Drags
was listed as a new record for the newly created voltage class 'A3'
(349V and up) in the wrong class as SC/A3. My car indeed, has a
non-stock rear end (Ford 9 inch Dutchman Motorsports) and other mods
that forced the new ProStreet class 'SP'. As determined by the NEDRA
board (not me) White Zombie is no longer racing in the Street Conversion
class (SC) and is now racing in the SP (ProStreet) class. White Zombie's
new record should have been listed as SP/A3, not SC/A3.
No rules were bent, so relax Dennis....I didn't even know it had been
listed that way until it was 'brought to your attention'. I've already
called NEDRA to alert them of the error so it can be corrected.
In addition, White Zombie's '05 record still listed in the SC/A class of
12.151 @ 106.25 mph, in fairness to new racers and to make sense with
the restructuring of the higher voltage classes, should be changed as
well. White Zombie set that record when it was running at 348V, which at
the time, was within the original 'A' voltage class. The new highest
voltage classes are now 'A' at 241V-300V, 'A2' at 341V-348V
(incorrectly listed at the NEDRA page as 300V-348V), and 'A3' at 349V
and up. I think the Zombie's record from the old class 'A' should be
acknowledged to have been set in the original class 'A' but
appropriately moved out from 'A' and into the new class 'A2'. This
change will do two things....it will make it so that new EVs that may be
designed to be in the 300V level of the new 'A' class won't have to try
to beat a car's record that was set at 348V...and, newbies looking into
the current records won't see a 348V car listed as holding a record in a
class that is limited to a max voltage of 300. This would open the door
in the 'A' class for guys like Matt Graham and his hot 240SX 'Joule
Injected' to establish new records. I am not on any rules commiteee and
am not a NEDRA board member, but this just seems to be a common sense
thing to do.
See Ya....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Chip,
I appreciate your detailed, prompt, and informative response. You are
an excellent representative for NEDRA and I have much confidence for
it's future prosperity with folks like you involved. Your answer to my
question makes sense. This issue will solve itself as the sport grows.
I calculated the top speed of the Electropolitan at 24 volts just in
case I wanted to take a shot at that record. How does 12 mph sound?
(insert laughter here), I think that one is safe.
See you in Maryland with a brand new car.....
Shawn Lawless
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 4:06 AM
Subject: Re: Multiple NEDRA Records and Production Class
Shawn, Dennis, John and Steve
Thanks for letting us know about the NEDRA Records and Production Class
issues.
I have summarized the concerns and sent them to the NEDRA Board with my
proposed revisions to correct the typos on the website. As webmaster, I
will put up the changes as soon as the Board Members (Brian, Father
Time, Roderick and Ken Koch) are fully aware of the concern and approve
the corrections.
But in the meantime, I will discuss the typos in the site. And this
will help clear up Dennis' concern about the SC and PS class and
Steve's concern about the Production Class.
STREET CONVERSION AND PRO STREET CONVERSION
First typo and Dennis' concern: John Wayland's car is actually in the
"Pro-Street" class NOT the "Street Conversion" class. On the website
his record is incorrectly shown as "SC/A3" and it should be "PS/A3".
John and I have discussed the issue this evening.
I have made the change in Dreamweaver on my Mac, but like I said, I
need to make sure the NEDRA Board is fully aware of it before I post it
up. NEDRA President, Brian Hall, is responsible for the Records page
and he needs to be notified first before I post up the change.
Since John's car is in the Pro-Street class this should allay Dennis
concerns about his project. From what he has mentioned so far I believe
his truck is also in the Pro-Street class since he has a Ford 9-inch
rear but we will have to know the full details about the specs first.
We welcome Dennis' new truck to race in 2007.
Second typo: In the "Description of Classes and Voltage Divisions"
table below the records we have "SP" for ProStreet and this should be
"PS". "SP" is actually for Street Production. That's my bad.
Third typo: My bad again. In the Class and Voltage table below the
Record Holders - in Voltage Division, A2 should be "301 to 348" instead
of "300 to 348". It is correct on the "Class Rules" page.
PRODUCTION CLASS
Which brings us to Steve's concern about the Production Class, we do in
fact have a class for OEM EVs and that is the "Street Production"
class. There are 6 NEDRA records in this class. But at this time we
have not yet written a detailed description of this class like we have
done for the "Street Classes". This class is for production EVs like
the Sparrow, the EV1 and RAV-4 EV.
We also have classes for Dragsters (DR), Motorcycles (MT) and (HS) High
School vehicles, but NEDRA still needs to write up detailed
descriptions for these classes.
We wrote up the "Street Class" descriptions first since this has
accounted for most of the questions concerning the technical issues of
these vehicles. It took us three months to write that up and get the
technical details ironed out.
Since we put up the new "Street Classes" NEDRA was in the process of
recruiting a new Technical Director. Now that Ken Koch from KTA
Services is on-board as Technical Director and as soon as he has
finished some other priorities he will help write up the new class
descriptions for the Street Production, Dragster, Motorcycle and High
School Classes.
These should be ready by the 2007 racing season.
So please bear with us. Like I said as soon as the NEDRA Board
discusses these latest concerns we will update the site ASAP. I made
the changes but have not put them up on the server until the other
Board members know and approve. It can't be done now because it's 4:00
am my time and the Board will probably not get to my email until the
weekend.
VEHICLES TAKING MULTIPLE RECORDS
In response to Shawn's concern NEDRA has in place a rule concerning
this issue which is at the bottom of the Record Holder's page
Briefly what this says is that you can only have one record per day.
This prevents racers from changing pack voltages in any single event.
"If you wish to submit a new record holder time, the rules are as
follows:
* You (the owner of the vehicle) MUST be a member of NEDRA at the time
the record is set.
* Send two time slips (the times must be within 1% of each other) from
runs made on the same day at any NHRA sanctioned track or a NEDRA
sanctioned event, information about the track, track contact, event
date, vehicle class and voltage division, vehicle specs, driver and
owner as well as a photo of the vehicle to . . ."
Since racers are allowed to get records on an approved NHRA track there
isn't anything we can do to prevent them from racing one weekend and
getting a record then the next weekend changing the battery pack to a
different voltage and to get another record. As long as they don't do
it in the same day that is fine.
Once we have more cars and bikes racing this should thin out the field.
But since we have so few vehicles actively racing today this is going
to be an issue.
I would suggest people build and race cars and bikes. Take a look at
the Records page and build a vehicle you feel can compete in a
particular class. We would love to see more vehicles on the Records
Page.
Hopefully this should clear some issues up.
Chip Gribben
NEDRA Webmaster
http://www.nedra.com
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Robert,
Nice of you to respond. Could you provide more info about your dc/dc converter?
Thanks,
storm
----- Original Message ----
From: Ev Performance (Robert Chew) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2006 9:46:21 PM
Subject: Re: Solar EV power
The little fiat with solar panel belongs to me.
The top speed of the vehicle is low,and my driving conditions is low seed,
below 60 km/hr so drag is not such a huge consideration.
And also from a full days charging, i use my homebuilt boost dc dc convertor
to step up the voltage of my panels to nominal 72.
I get around 4kms.
My car does from the batteries, 130-150wh /km (not AC). I have 3 lots of 55
watt suntech modules on the vehicle. Over here in downuner, there is plenty
of sun.
that 4km's is more than the distance i drive everyday from my home to the
shopping center where i park to catch a train (3km's). ALthough it is great
to be able to plug my car in with the installed electric vehicle charging
bay that the shopping center as kind enough to install.
Solar panels on cars depends on individual situation. I personally think it
is ideal to have a grid connected system at home supplying power to the grid
and then use the grid to charge the car. But hey, solar panels on cars make
it look cool and futuristic!
Cheers
On 10/11/06, Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sure, if you only drove it 15 miles or less once a week.
>
> Of course if you only go somewhere once a week, it might be cheaper to
> take a cab.
>
> > If you only drove the car every few days couldn't it completely recharge
> > it?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 12:42 pm, Michael wrote:
> >>> A little Fiat with a solar panel on top. Maybe you could ask his how
> >>> he
> >>> did it. Christie
> >>
> >> I'd ask why he bothered. <vbg> Though I suppose an extra mile a day
> >> could
> >> be worthwhile.
> >
> > www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily images about hurricanes, globalwarming
> > and the melting poles.
> >
> > www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake images.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 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 ---
Hey John,
Reading your posts reminds me why I love electric drag racing. The
changes we make to drive, chassis, control, batteries, etc... are wide
ranging and wide open. It's the "I wonder what doing this will do?" and
then finding out that is such a blast for me. Speaking of "class" your
a class guy all the way.
Going up in voltage is a natural progression and should not be
penalized in any way.
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: Multiple NEDRA records
Hello to All,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was just perusing the NEDRA sight and realized a current trend. A >
few vehicles are switching voltages up and down and gobbling up alot >
of the records. I understand in a free world to the victor goes the >
spoils but it makes me kinda sad. Are there any NEDRA limitations to >
how many voltage classes can be held by one vehicle?
There's really no limitation to how many records one can hold with a
particular vehicle, other than the same day rule which prohibits
changing voltage classes during same day races. The tone of your post
seems to be, that you do not think its very sportsmanlike for someone
with a hot EV to purposefully pull batteries-lowering the power level
but also lightening the vehicle, then establishing records in other
voltage classes. I agree with this mindset.
I could pull 14 of the 30 batteries from White Zombie which would
lighten it by 343 lbs. and drop its voltage to 192V, then compete in
the 'C' voltage class. The car would probably run a high 13. I won't do
this though, because of two reasons.... (1) I do not feel it's good
sportsmanship (2) My goal is to keep making the car as quick and fast
as it can possibly be.
I've always kept my focus on ever-increasing my car's performance
rather than seeing how many different class records I could capture.
There's only been one time where I went from a higher voltage down to a
lower voltage and captured a record, and that was dictated purely by
the battery sponsorship offered to me at the time. When Exide first
approached me about running 40 lb. Orbitals, I passed on the idea,
telling them that to hit the 300V+ level would require far too much
volume and weight in batteries. I instead, kept the voltage at 336V
when I selected 28 of their 26 lb. import line called 'Power Fit' -
Hawker sized batteries that didn't even come close to Hawker
performance. The 728 lb. pack proved to be a total disaster at the
track, blowing up with currents as low a 500 amps. When the small
import batteries didn't work out, Exide was still eager to provide
Orbitals. I reluctantly went with heavy 40 lb. batteries for the '04
racing season. The sheer weight of each Orbital meant I had to lower
the pack voltage to keep the maximum pack weight to my established ~
700 lb. limit. Thus, 18 of them weighed 720 lbs. and dropped the pack
voltage down to 216V. The 216V car initially only ran 15's, but after
lots of tweaking to take advantage of the HUGE currents these batteries
could dish out - adding two more batteries for 240V and my 'Afterburner
Bypass', I squeezed a 12.99 ET from the car.
With the above exception, from '94 to present, White Zombie always went
higher in voltage as I pushed the car's performance. In '94 it was at
175V, in '96 it was at 180V, in '97 it was at 240V, then from '98 -
2002 it was at 336V. The peak of performance with the light weight 336V
pack came in May of 2000 with a 13.1 ET. In 2003 with an aging and
tired 336V battery pack and ETs progressively getting slower, to keep
the car somewhat competitive I ran the car up to 408V just for the '03
Woodburn drags, when as a last minute idea I added a 72V Hawker booster
pack to the tired 336V pack and managed to pull a 13.55 ET. In 2004 as
already described, the small and tired 378 lb. 336V pack was replaced
with the heavier Power Fit Exides, then after that didn't pan out, the
change to even larger and heavier Orbital batteries forced going down
to 216V. That pack grew to 240V. In 2005 with new sponsorship from
Aerobatteries and Hawker, I returned to my high voltage ways. A new 710
lb. 348V pack of 29, 24.5 lb. Hawker Aerobatteries went in and the ETs
went so deep into the 12's we were smelling the 11's! In search of
those 11's, the pack then went up to its present 360V level with 30
batteries at 735 lbs.
From Dennis Berube:
you will not see me doing this,I do not think it fair >to upcoming
competitors.
It appears that in regards to dropping to lower voltage classes purely
to claim new records, Dennis feels the same way as Shawn and I do.
More from Dennis Berube:
To race in the SC class however one canot have >a rear end other than
the stock housing. I did not read all the rules however >before I built
the S10,so I did put in a 9in.ford already. So I assume (if I >join
nedra again in the future)that I will be in the pro street class. After
>reading about the current SC class record holders its come to my
attention that >they may indeed also have 9in ford rears. So my
question to nedra, can the rules be >bent? And how much?
Dennis, I believe I found what 'came to your attention'. I hadn't gone
to the NEDRA records page for some time, but after reading your
comments about 'bending rules' I took a look. I was surprised to find
that White Zombie's 12.308 @ 104.20 mph run from the August Late Night
NEDRA Drags was listed as a new record for the newly created voltage
class 'A3' (349V and up) in the wrong class as SC/A3. My car indeed,
has a non-stock rear end (Ford 9 inch Dutchman Motorsports) and other
mods that forced the new ProStreet class 'SP'. As determined by the
NEDRA board (not me) White Zombie is no longer racing in the Street
Conversion class (SC) and is now racing in the SP (ProStreet) class.
White Zombie's new record should have been listed as SP/A3, not SC/A3.
No rules were bent, so relax Dennis....I didn't even know it had been
listed that way until it was 'brought to your attention'. I've already
called NEDRA to alert them of the error so it can be corrected.
In addition, White Zombie's '05 record still listed in the SC/A class
of 12.151 @ 106.25 mph, in fairness to new racers and to make sense
with the restructuring of the higher voltage classes, should be changed
as well. White Zombie set that record when it was running at 348V,
which at the time, was within the original 'A' voltage class. The new
highest voltage classes are now 'A' at 241V-300V, 'A2' at 341V-348V
(incorrectly listed at the NEDRA page as 300V-348V), and 'A3' at 349V
and up. I think the Zombie's record from the old class 'A' should be
acknowledged to have been set in the original class 'A' but
appropriately moved out from 'A' and into the new class 'A2'. This
change will do two things....it will make it so that new EVs that may
be designed to be in the 300V level of the new 'A' class won't have to
try to beat a car's record that was set at 348V...and, newbies looking
into the current records won't see a 348V car listed as holding a
record in a class that is limited to a max voltage of 300. This would
open the door in the 'A' class for guys like Matt Graham and his hot
240SX 'Joule Injected' to establish new records. I am not on any rules
commiteee and am not a NEDRA board member, but this just seems to be a
common sense thing to do.
See Ya....John Wayland
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I thought that if they weren't fully charged they would lose capacity- like a
memory effect. Is this not true? Also for shallow discharges.
----- Original Message ----
From: Roland Wiench <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2006 10:01:40 AM
Subject: Re: Renewable Energy Idea, an' More!
One way to reduce your electrical bill, is not to charge the batteries above
90% or even 80% every time you charge it, unless you have to squeeze every
bit of energy out of your batteries for your range.
If you have to deplete the batteries below 50% on every drive, than its best
to have a higher AH battery for range and long life.
My battery cycles for a 260 AH battery is from 90 to 80% which takes out
about 25 AH which takes only 30 to 35 minutes to charge to 90%.
About every three and sometimes every 6 months, I water, do a balance charge
and then charge the batteries to 100%.
Trying to break my old record of 12 years on my last set of batteries, which
were Exide X something of 235 AH.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: Renewable Energy Idea, an' More!
>
> In a message dated 11/8/2006 11:32:42 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Of course I do expect the 'lectric bill to go up when I get
> another EV back in servive?
>
>
>
> First full month of operating the trike, my bill went up $10 or so. (7
> cents a KWH - municipally owner utility) Plugged it in most nights,
> covered
> about 400 miles the first month - all in town. Part of that increase
> could just
> be the "noise" of month to month changes - an extra day or two in the
> meter
> reading cycle, the approach of Winter and so on.
>
> Matt Parkhouse
> Colorado Springs, CO
> BMW m/c-Golf Cart trike - 48 volts, 30mph on the flat, 35 mile range
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 11/9/2006 8:52:01 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Subj: Re: Multiple NEDRA records
> Date:11/9/2006 8:52:01 PM Pacific Standard Time
> From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-to:[email protected]
> To:[email protected]
> Received from Internet:
>
>
>
> Dennis,
>
> My California trip has been postponed. I was really looking forward to
> seeing the CE run again.
> Keep us posted on future runs.
>
> What was your best run in 2003? I thought I had the quickest at 10.80.
> How much did you get me by?
>
> Shawn
Hi Shawn,Sorry not to see you this weekend.I would have to look through the
timeslips but I believe your 10.80 holds to be the quickest,I was bracket
racing that year. Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 11/10/2006 4:52:18 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Subj: Re: Multiple NEDRA records
> Date:11/10/2006 4:52:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
> From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-to:[email protected]
> To:[email protected]
> Received from Internet:
>
>
>
> Hey John,
>
> Reading your posts reminds me why I love electric drag racing. The
> changes we make to drive, chassis, control, batteries, etc... are wide
> ranging and wide open. It's the "I wonder what doing this will do?" and
> then finding out that is such a blast for me. Speaking of "class" your
> a class guy all the way.
> Going up in voltage is a natural progression and should not be
> penalized in any way.
>
> Shawn
I second this post and add Pro Street sounds pretty cool in front of the
White Zombie Record Dennis Berube
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Excellent information Chip. I guess all we needed to do was ask.
While we're on the topic, I'll throw out a few more things
There is no mention of being able to set a record at an IHRA track. A
gentlemen on the list, the Alaska guy right? just asked about running his
vehicle at an IHRA track. I said he'd have no problem with the rules, but I
didn't think about being able to set a record. I seem to recall it was said
a year or so ago that IHRA was OK with the electrics.
Can I get a ruling here?
Now I know maybe I shouldn't be too hung up on details, as this is really
supposed to be for fun. But if we've got all these rules in place already,
lets get them right. I do think having quite a few rules does establish
NEDRA as a professional looking group.
I was just thinking that I renewed my membership just before the last NEDRA
election. I'm pretty sure my membership had expired before that. And I
know I'm going to feel like a dummy when I show up at the next NEDRA race,
or maybe the one after that, and find that my membership has lapsed. What's
up with this? Maybe a list on the web page of members in good standing,
along with their start date and membership expiration date? I don't know if
anyone is against publishing the member list, but if that listed names and
cities with emails, it might get people especially in the same city/region
together. Or just set all memberships to end at the same time each year,
maybe twice a year?
Just a few things on my mind.
Darin
BadFishRacing
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chip Gribben" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 4:06 AM
Subject: Re: Multiple NEDRA Records and Production Class
Shawn, Dennis, John and Steve
Thanks for letting us know about the NEDRA Records and Production Class
issues.
I have summarized the concerns and sent them to the NEDRA Board with my
proposed revisions to correct the typos on the website. As webmaster, I
will put up the changes as soon as the Board Members (Brian, Father Time,
Roderick and Ken Koch) are fully aware of the concern and approve the
corrections.
But in the meantime, I will discuss the typos in the site. And this will
help clear up Dennis' concern about the SC and PS class and Steve's
concern about the Production Class.
STREET CONVERSION AND PRO STREET CONVERSION
First typo and Dennis' concern: John Wayland's car is actually in the
"Pro-Street" class NOT the "Street Conversion" class. On the website his
record is incorrectly shown as "SC/A3" and it should be "PS/A3". John and
I have discussed the issue this evening.
I have made the change in Dreamweaver on my Mac, but like I said, I need
to make sure the NEDRA Board is fully aware of it before I post it up.
NEDRA President, Brian Hall, is responsible for the Records page and he
needs to be notified first before I post up the change.
Since John's car is in the Pro-Street class this should allay Dennis
concerns about his project. From what he has mentioned so far I believe
his truck is also in the Pro-Street class since he has a Ford 9-inch rear
but we will have to know the full details about the specs first. We
welcome Dennis' new truck to race in 2007.
Second typo: In the "Description of Classes and Voltage Divisions" table
below the records we have "SP" for ProStreet and this should be "PS".
"SP" is actually for Street Production. That's my bad.
Third typo: My bad again. In the Class and Voltage table below the Record
Holders - in Voltage Division, A2 should be "301 to 348" instead of "300
to 348". It is correct on the "Class Rules" page.
PRODUCTION CLASS
Which brings us to Steve's concern about the Production Class, we do in
fact have a class for OEM EVs and that is the "Street Production" class.
There are 6 NEDRA records in this class. But at this time we have not yet
written a detailed description of this class like we have done for the
"Street Classes". This class is for production EVs like the Sparrow, the
EV1 and RAV-4 EV.
We also have classes for Dragsters (DR), Motorcycles (MT) and (HS) High
School vehicles, but NEDRA still needs to write up detailed descriptions
for these classes.
We wrote up the "Street Class" descriptions first since this has
accounted for most of the questions concerning the technical issues of
these vehicles. It took us three months to write that up and get the
technical details ironed out.
Since we put up the new "Street Classes" NEDRA was in the process of
recruiting a new Technical Director. Now that Ken Koch from KTA Services
is on-board as Technical Director and as soon as he has finished some
other priorities he will help write up the new class descriptions for the
Street Production, Dragster, Motorcycle and High School Classes.
These should be ready by the 2007 racing season.
So please bear with us. Like I said as soon as the NEDRA Board discusses
these latest concerns we will update the site ASAP. I made the changes
but have not put them up on the server until the other Board members know
and approve. It can't be done now because it's 4:00 am my time and the
Board will probably not get to my email until the weekend.
VEHICLES TAKING MULTIPLE RECORDS
In response to Shawn's concern NEDRA has in place a rule concerning this
issue which is at the bottom of the Record Holder's page
Briefly what this says is that you can only have one record per day. This
prevents racers from changing pack voltages in any single event.
"If you wish to submit a new record holder time, the rules are as
follows:
* You (the owner of the vehicle) MUST be a member of NEDRA at the time
the record is set.
* Send two time slips (the times must be within 1% of each other) from
runs made on the same day at any NHRA sanctioned track or a NEDRA
sanctioned event, information about the track, track contact, event date,
vehicle class and voltage division, vehicle specs, driver and owner as
well as a photo of the vehicle to . . ."
Since racers are allowed to get records on an approved NHRA track there
isn't anything we can do to prevent them from racing one weekend and
getting a record then the next weekend changing the battery pack to a
different voltage and to get another record. As long as they don't do it
in the same day that is fine.
Once we have more cars and bikes racing this should thin out the field.
But since we have so few vehicles actively racing today this is going to
be an issue.
I would suggest people build and race cars and bikes. Take a look at the
Records page and build a vehicle you feel can compete in a particular
class. We would love to see more vehicles on the Records Page.
Hopefully this should clear some issues up.
Chip Gribben
NEDRA Webmaster
http://www.nedra.com
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.0/525 - Release Date: 11/9/2006
--- End Message ---
