EV Digest 6149
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Simple Isolation Question
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) re: Transmission vs no transmission
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Battery Advice Needed (LONG)
by Mike Chancey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Parallel Nimh is Here NOW- Misinformation?
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Charging Discharging
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Water heaters
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Lead acid terminal types
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: KillaCycle - SPARKS - at end of Video
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Simple Isolation Question
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Myers Motors Qui Moto
by "Jay Caplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Qui Moto
by Mike Swift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Myers Motors Qui Moto
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Parallel Nimh is Here NOW
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) re: Transmission vs no transmission
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Patent revocation, Now: Myers Motors Qui Moto
by "Edward Ang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: Myers Motors Qui Moto
by "Curtis Muhlestein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Parallel Nimh is Here NOW- Misinformation?
by "Edward Ang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Roger Stockton wrote:
Unfortunately, this is not possible with a series motor: it is
impossible to reverse the direction of rotation by reversing the
polarity of the power applied to the motor. The direction of rotation
can only be reversed by reversing the connections to either the field or
armature, but not both.
Do I have the 8" ADC motor I've been testing hooked up wrong?
I have S1 jumpered to A2. Positive battery to S2 and negative to A1
spins the motor, if I reverse polarity on the A1 and S2 it spins in reverse.
Jack
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 12:55 AM 11/19/2006, Lee Hart wrote:
The Sparrows came with isolated Zivan chargers (I don't know what
the Myers version uses). The Sparrows also had fiberglass bodies, so
a shorted DC/DC might not even be noticed.
Also, many Sparrows have the 12v gnd and Pack gnd tied together.
There are instructions on the Sparrow_EV group on how to "De-Fang" a bird.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You might find some data points on this in the archive. here are my
thoughts.
"It Depends"
If you have something that can bring down the motor rpm's during the
shift (like an alternator with the field tied to a switch on the clutch
pedel) then you can shift as fast as in an ICE. If not you either hammer
the driveline or you wait 2-4 seconds to shift.
If you car is heavy for the one ratio you would choose, then you go into
controller current limit and crawl slowly wasting more power an annoying
traffic.
If the car is light for the ratio you choose, it lurches and pulses as
the rpms come up quick and so does armature voltage and either the over
voltage or overRPM sensor temporarily throttles back the controller. The
wind up in the drive train releases and the process starts again.
Embarassing, looks like a kid learning how to use the clutch for the
first time.
In my conversion 1st is too low to be usefull, 2nd is a tad high but
that is what I got.
3d is too high to start from a light with, draws a lot of current and lugs.
When I had 17 batteries instead of 24(300lbs less battery), starting in
3rd was fine and 2nd was perfect.
I drove all in third and 2nd-3rd to work a few times. Shifting used less
energy, but not that much difference, and of course acceleration was not
as good.
Lugging excersises the pukert effect more.
Catching all the lights green to work in my 7 mile commute uses 2100Kwh
for 300Wh/mile. This is being mindful of upcomeing lights and coasting
when I can and accelerating slower than "jeffs default" :-) .
Having to stop for all of them is 2800Kwh for 400Wh/mile
I took the spirited drive to work once and didn't anticipate upcoming
lights and nailed the accelerator every light and it took 3100Kwh for 8
miles or 442Wh/mile
The difference would be greater if I had flooded or if the vehicle was
lighter. I have orbitals and I already pay an acceleration (lugging)
penalty because she is soo heavy.
As soon as I get some funds freed up I plan on a siamese 9 setup, I
think this will decrease the differences in range (if I don't spin the
odometer faster than I am moving) I will have the same commute and I
have been logging every trip in a book for future comparisons.
PS, use these WH/mile numbers as comparison only, my odometer is
electronic and may not be accurate. speedo and odometer use same sensor
and speedo reads 65 at a dead stop and up from there. New sensor did not
fix it. So much for reliability of the digital dash.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi folks,
I just uploaded an Excel file of one charge cycle if anyone wants to
take a look. You can find it at:
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/DataLogging/onechargecycle.xls
Thanks,
Mike Chancey,
'88 Civic EV
Kansas City, Missouri
EV Photo Album at: http://evalbum.com
My Electric Car at: http://www.geocities.com/electric_honda
Mid-America EAA chapter at: http://maeaa.org
Join the EV List at: http://www.madkatz.com/ev/evlist.html
In medio stat virtus - Virtue is in the moderate, not the extreme
position. (Horace)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 19 Nov 2006 at 5:56, Bruce Weisenberger wrote:
> I am tire of all the great
> technology being presented and then not being
> available to anyone but a select few or in the
> experimental stage.
I suppose we all are, but that's the way it is. Maybe it would be better if we
just didn't hear about these developments that we can't have. ;-)
I'm sure that at least one of the EV parts vendors will chime in here, but it's
a
sad fact of life that we EV hobbyists represent one of the most demanding
(costly) and least profitable markets for vendors.
We require lots of hand-holding (which costs vendors time and money).
Worse, we're spoiled by high levels of customer service from mass market
retailers (often delivered with $8 per hour or less labor). We expect someone
at the other end of the phone 24 hours a day. We raise hell if an EV parts
vendor doesn't provide the same level of service with their $100 per hour
engineers and their $30 per hour techs. I see people complaining about this
on the EV list every week.
And of course we want the parts to be as cheap as possible - ideally about
the same as we pay for ICE parts. In an era when we can buy a desktop
computer for $300 (!), it's something of a shock to see prices that actually
and accurately reflect the cost of engineering and production amortized over
a few hundred units, instead of a few hundred thousand or million. That's why
controllers and chargers can easily cost $5-10k each.
My hat's off to folks like Rich, Otmar, and Victor. They're building, selling,
and supporting EV parts at prices that are tough to sustain. We'll be lucky if
they don't burn out doing this. I don't think they get enough recognition for
what they do.
And they are a rarity. Most people understandably want to make a good
living without having to spend, effectively, 24 hours a day on the job. How
about you?
Many of the parts we use in our EVs were designed for other purposes -
forklifts, industrial vehicles, boats, and even various ICEs. Their relatively
low
cost is made possible by - you guessed it - mass production. EV hobbyists
are NOT a mass market, but some of the above markets are (relatively
speaking). We get to ride along.
When some industrial vehicle manufacturer, golf car builder, or even an
automaker contracts with Edward's company to buy a quantity of his NiMH
modules, then we'll have an in. We'll eventually be able to buy them from
that user or automaker as spares. Who knows, a few years down the road
they may even be available at Autozone as remanufactured parts.
I don't speak for Edward, but my guess is that if you want them before then,
all you have to do is find a way to make it worth his while financially to
build
them for you.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rush wrote:
I realize that the paper deals with Lions, but it seems that it should
also apply to PbA batteries. From what I know there is only one
'balancer/regulator' that actually balances the pack as it is
discharging, and that is Lee Hart's.
The Zivan Smoother and Badicheq also did this. As far as I know, they
are no longer available. The Powercheqs do it, but at low current.
What do our battery experts think about balancing while discharging?
Does it add to pack life? Is it worth the expense?
It is more expensive, but it does indeed extend battery life. I've
reported before that I had one battery fail, and was able to keep
driving my EV for months with essentially normal range, because the
Balancer was "propping it up". With aggressive balancing (say, a current
of 10%-20% of the cell's amphour capacity), your range is limited by the
average capacity of each cell in the pack rather than the weakest cell.
Is it also something that is incorporated into the BMS system that
Valance has?
I don't know what they are doing. Most lithium balancers just use shunt
regulators to burn up the excess charging current as heat.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mike Harvey wrote:
Hey Lee. Do you have the specs on the thermal fuse you're using? Sounds
like the right way to go.
It has the same thermal fuse that came with the heater, but wired to
trigger an SCR. The SCR shorts the heater element, which in turn blows
the 20a 250vdc rated fuse to the pack. This is called a "crowbar" circuit.
The thermal cutout switch is wired in series with the coil of the 12vdc
relay that switches the heater. It opens at a lower temperature than the
fuse, so it will act first to turn off the relay to stop the heater. If
this fails (relay welded, etc.), then the crowbar circuit backs it up.
--
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 ---
Roland Wiench wrote:
These Trojans 260 ah stay very clean, there is no terminal corrosion
at all...
Thanks Roland. Your strategy may seem like overkill, but it works. I
really have to see your EV someday -- it sounds like something NASA
would build!
--
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 ---
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Murray<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
Hello Jack,
For one direction in a series motor, you connect the S1 and A2 together and
S2 and A1 to power for one direction as you have now.
For the other direction, you connect the S1 to A1 together and S2 and A2 to
power.
You need a reversing contactor which is can be two single pole contactors or
a two pole double pole contactor mechanical and electrical tie together. One
contactor is Normally Close (NC) and the other contactor is Normally Open (NO).
With no control power to the contactors, one contactor is open (NO) and the
other contactor is close (NC).
These contactors are interlock together so both contactors do not come on at
the same time.
To reversed a series motors, you must do two operations.
S2 is to negative as in your motor now.
Lets say your S1 to A2 if the normal forward direction of the EV, then you
want this direction by applying no power to the reversing contactors or the NC
contactor connects S1 to A1.
The other NO contactor is connected to S1 and goes to A1 which is open.
This action rewires the motor connections.
Its best to sketch out the circuits as you read the following:
Now we must reconnected the positive from the controller to A1 while S1 is
connected to A2 or positive to A2 while S1 is connected to A1. This either
requires another 2 pole reversing contactor with NO and NC contacts that is
also interlock to the other 2 pole reversing contactor.
Normally these reversing contactors come as a 2 pole double throw unit that
is all mechanical interlock. To explain the operation of changing the positive
to either A1 or A2, I will explain it as another 2 pole contactor with NO and
NC contactors.
The Positive from the controller is connected to the NC and NO contactors.
The NO is connected to A2 and the NC is connected to A1.
While there is no power on this reversing contactor, S1 is connected to A2
and the positive is connected to A1 for one direction or should be the forward
direction.
While there is power to this reversing contactor, S1 is connected to A2 and
the positive power is connected to A1 for the other direction or should be for
reversed.
You only want the reversing contactor energized in the reversed direction and
off in the forward direction.
Before you change directions, you should let up on the power to the
controller, which in some controllers, drop off the main contactor, come to a
stop and then go into reversed. In this way, you are operating this reversing
contactor not under load.
Roland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The near-total darkness made it look a LOT more spectacular than it really was.
There is no direct path from the tire to the motor. The bolt (or nut)
zigged, zagged, and bounced past the edge of the fender, under the
plasma shield, along the top of the motor, and slipped into the brush
rigging. There is no direct path, so we didn't even realize it was
possible until it actually happened. (We will definitely correct this
for the next race.)
I think the "firefly" you see is a hot blob of something that the
rear tire picked up from the track and tossed into the air. Again,
there is no direct path in that trajectory from the motors.
The motor commutators are shielded on all sides, as per NHRA and
NEDRA requirements. The bike has passed tech inspection countless
times without a problem because it is 100% compliant with the rules.
Bill Dube'
At 10:30 AM 11/18/2006, you wrote:
several posts mentioned that bolts were found on the track and that
one must have been picked up by the tire and thrown through the back
motor and exited in a different state of matter :op
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Lough" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List RCVR" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 11:09 AM
Subject: KillaCycle - SPARKS - at end of Video
Thought I have combed through the last few days of EVDL posts quite
carefully.. But
NO ANSWER as to what the sparks were. BILL ?? Can you tell us. ??
Im speaking of the video on YouTube, of your record runs last week..
And as the bike goes up the exit run,, there is a shower of sparks.
Two folks have asked... if you know what they were caused
by....Could you let us know.?
(maybe it is a secret weapon... a Plasma JET gone bad ? )
--
Steven S. Lough, Pres.
Seattle EV Association
6021 32nd Ave. N.E.
Seattle, WA 98115-7230
Day: 206 850-8535
Eve: 206 524-1351
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://www.seattleeva.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Cor van de Water wrote:
Lee,
I like it - a simple DPDT switch, the only issue would be
when someone would throw it at load/speed.
It would be straightforward to have a solenoid that is activated to lock
the switch in position when the throttle is depressed. I'll bet you
could even have a solenoid with a 1-turn coil that is in series with the
motor, so motor current itself pulls in the solenoid.
the fact that 4 contactors are used is because there is no "systems"
approach... the controller manufacturer is optimizing the controller
by itself, which is sub-optimal for almost all applications...
Yes, I agree. Some controllers come with all the necessary contactors,
prechargers, etc. But too many buyers want 'cheap'; and won't buy them.
Curtis has the biggest share of the market because they make their
controllers as cheaply as possible, by leaving out anything not
absolutely necessary. Of course, it costs more when you have to add
these features back in yourself; but many people don't think that far
ahead. :-)
Would he look at the non-transmission EVs as a system, the
controller would have a bridge output and reverse by its
electronics, or at least have a push-pull (for example all
MOSFETs instead of switch and diode) output, which would
reduce the nr of contactors from 4 to 2, which can then
be replaced by one single pole that switches the other
motor contact between +batt and -batt.
Well, a series motor is the cheapest. With this type of motor, even a
full bridge can't reverse it. You need a DPDT switch to reverse the
field, *and* a separate PWM to throttle the armature. That's 5
switches/transistors as a minimum.
Despite their apparent cost, a contactor is cheaper than a transistor
once you include all the necessary heatsinks, cooling, and drive
electronics.
And a mechanical switch is cheaper than a contactor.
The contactor for the heater is unnecessary if a simple
PWM control is used, which can be much cheaper than the
contactor.
You might think so... but it doesn't work out in practice.
BTW: if I were to design a controller, I would be very
tempted to integrate a simple extra PWM output for a heater
as that costs only a single extra MOSFET and one pin on the
microcontroller.
You could, but I wouldn't. The heater is an unrelated function.
I would also integrate the pre-charge and main contactor
functionalty by some additional MOSFETs that are current
limited for the precharge, then full-on.
This is a good idea. Precharge should really be part of the controller.
When the throttle is released (or whenever the contactor control
is dropped) you fire a TRIAC across the motor outputs to short them.
If you short a spinning series motor, you get a series GENERATOR! It
will generates its maximum current, maximum braking torque, and probably
break something!
While we are at it,
the 12V DC/DC and the battery pack chargers can also
be integrated into one master brain, which would need
a selection/programming of charge algorithms but make
an EV real simple.
Integrating similar or related functions together makes sense.
Integrating different and unrelated functions might appear to save
money, but usually creates unfixable buggy systems.
--
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 ---
Chet Neeley wrote:
Another option for inexpensive, isolated DC/DCs are the DCP, DCV and DCR
series from Texas Instruments. These are relatively inexpensive (sub $12 @
qty 1), reasonably friendly packaging-wise (DIPs available in most all
parts), have 1KV or more of isolation and are typically stocked by Digikey
and thus available for purchase in single piece quantities.
The only caveat with the non-regulated ones is that if you're load is going
to be very small, you may want to add a resistive load of ~15% of the
nominal rated output so the output voltage of the 12V versions isn't >
~13.5V.
An example part is:
DCP021212P ($11.58 Qty 1 Digikey)
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/dcp020503.pdf
The input range is only 10.8-13.2v; a car's 12v accessory battery goes
both above and below this.
The E-meter draws up to 225ma at 12v = 2.7 watts; this is a 2 watt
converter.
The isolation spec is 1000vrms for 1 second. Note that this is a "flash"
test; one time only, not to be repeated. It is UL listed to standard
UL1950; this is a standard for low voltage devices, not to exceed 30v
input/output in normal operation. Again, it is for recognition only; not
to be repeated.
This kind of test usually means that the primary and secondary of the
transformer have only magnet wire insulation on them, and are wound
right on top of each other. High voltages will arc through the
insulation, leaving a hole between them. Testing for 1 second doesn't
allow time for the arc to carbonize the material to create a permanent
short. Testing for 1 minute (as UL requires) will carbonize the path and
permanently damage the part; but it passes UL1950 as long as the leakage
current does not exceed 10ma and it does not catch fire, explode, or do
anything dangerous.
Don't get me wrong; these are all good parts that people are suggesting.
They just aren't good enough for the application, especially if you ever
use a non-isolated charger.
--
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 ---
Here's a mention of who designed it in clay: Goes back to 1991 as gas
engined design. Not new at all, just planned as an electrified version.
"Stringer built a full-size, two-seat performance road car called the Qui
Moto to demonstrate just how clay modeling is accomplished. Not intended for
production, the car was built as a theme for a sports tourer of the future
that would lean into a turn like a motorcycle. It would use active
suspension, a motorcycle engine, and a Kevlar and carbon fiber composite
body over a honey- comb and aluminum monocoque chassis tub." from
http://www.chavant.com/new_site/files/pdf/chavant_news01.pdf
http://www.3wheelers.com/projgal4.html
---- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Ang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: Was: Patent revocation, Now: Myers Motors Qui Moto
> Qui Moto is a concept vehicle, a 2-seater tandem sitting. It is now
> at the San Francisco Auto Show. In fact, I was just there this
> afternoon.
>
> On 11/18/06, Jay Snable <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Ed,
> >
> > Your post led me to revisit the AIR Lab site, then Myers. What the
> > heck is the Qui Moto?! I knew they were working on a next generation
> > but I haven't seen any mention until I stumbled upon this:
> >
> > http://www.myersmotors.com/Poster4.htm
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > On Nov 18, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Edward Ang wrote:
> >
> > > On 11/17/06, Ben Apollonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> So, no, NiMH can't be used for EV's. Period.
> > >
> > > I had to jump in now. Are you saying our Nimh powered Sparrow that
> > > has been running since Jan is not real? Many on this list have seen
> > > it in person. We now have 3 Nimh powered Sparrows on the road.
> > >
> > > See www.airlabcorp.com for details.
> > >
> > > Yes, you cannot parallel Nimh cells without a management system. But,
> > > wait, we have a mangement system!
> > >
> > > --
> > > Edward Ang
> > > President
> > > AIR Lab Corp
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Edward Ang
> President
> AIR Lab Corp
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
hmm, if I just reverse polarity then it still runs in the same direction?
That must be and it just looked like it was going backwards,
I'm going to go check..
Roland Wiench wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Murray<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
Hello Jack,
For one direction in a series motor, you connect the S1 and A2 together and S2 and A1 to power for one direction as you have now.
For the other direction, you connect the S1 to A1 together and S2 and A2 to power.
You need a reversing contactor which is can be two single pole contactors or
a two pole double pole contactor mechanical and electrical tie together. One
contactor is Normally Close (NC) and the other contactor is Normally Open (NO).
With no control power to the contactors, one contactor is open (NO) and the
other contactor is close (NC).
These contactors are interlock together so both contactors do not come on at the same time.
To reversed a series motors, you must do two operations.
S2 is to negative as in your motor now.
Lets say your S1 to A2 if the normal forward direction of the EV, then you want this direction by applying no power to the reversing contactors or the NC contactor connects S1 to A1.
The other NO contactor is connected to S1 and goes to A1 which is open.
This action rewires the motor connections.
Its best to sketch out the circuits as you read the following:
Now we must reconnected the positive from the controller to A1 while S1 is connected to A2 or positive to A2 while S1 is connected to A1. This either requires another 2 pole reversing contactor with NO and NC contacts that is also interlock to the other 2 pole reversing contactor.
Normally these reversing contactors come as a 2 pole double throw unit that is all mechanical interlock. To explain the operation of changing the positive to either A1 or A2, I will explain it as another 2 pole contactor with NO and NC contactors.
The Positive from the controller is connected to the NC and NO contactors. The NO is connected to A2 and the NC is connected to A1.
While there is no power on this reversing contactor, S1 is connected to A2 and the positive is connected to A1 for one direction or should be the forward direction.
While there is power to this reversing contactor, S1 is connected to A2 and the positive power is connected to A1 for the other direction or should be for reversed.
You only want the reversing contactor energized in the reversed direction and off in the forward direction.
Before you change directions, you should let up on the power to the controller, which in some controllers, drop off the main contactor, come to a stop and then go into reversed. In this way, you are operating this reversing contactor not under load.
Roland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Qui Moto is a french term meaning, "updated three wheel Messerschmitt
Tiger with electric drive". : )
On Nov 19, 2006, at 7:22 AM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: Jay Snable <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: November 18, 2006 6:43:11 PM PST
To: [email protected]
Subject: Was: Patent revocation, Now: Myers Motors Qui Moto
Hi Ed,
Your post led me to revisit the AIR Lab site, then Myers. What the
heck is the Qui Moto?! I knew they were working on a next
generation but I haven't seen any mention until I stumbled upon this:
http://www.myersmotors.com/Poster4.htm
Jay
Mike Swift
Two things only the people anxiously desire, bread and circuses.
Decimus Junius Juvenalls
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
..and it does go in same direction.
I can see why having another motor for reverse isn't so crazy given all
that reconfig needed to reverse the series motor.
Makes an AC motor look all that much better.
Jack
Jack Murray wrote:
hmm, if I just reverse polarity then it still runs in the same direction?
That must be and it just looked like it was going backwards,
I'm going to go check..
Roland Wiench wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: Jack
Murray<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Sunday,
November 19, 2006 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: Eliminate Reversing Contactors
Hello Jack,
For one direction in a series motor, you connect the S1 and A2
together and S2 and A1 to power for one direction as you have now.
For the other direction, you connect the S1 to A1 together and S2
and A2 to power.
You need a reversing contactor which is can be two single pole
contactors or a two pole double pole contactor mechanical and
electrical tie together. One contactor is Normally Close (NC) and the
other contactor is Normally Open (NO). With no control power to the
contactors, one contactor is open (NO) and the other contactor is
close (NC).
These contactors are interlock together so both contactors do not
come on at the same time.
To reversed a series motors, you must do two operations.
S2 is to negative as in your motor now.
Lets say your S1 to A2 if the normal forward direction of the EV,
then you want this direction by applying no power to the reversing
contactors or the NC contactor connects S1 to A1.
The other NO contactor is connected to S1 and goes to A1 which is open.
This action rewires the motor connections.
Its best to sketch out the circuits as you read the following:
Now we must reconnected the positive from the controller to A1
while S1 is connected to A2 or positive to A2 while S1 is connected to
A1. This either requires another 2 pole reversing contactor with NO
and NC contacts that is also interlock to the other 2 pole reversing
contactor.
Normally these reversing contactors come as a 2 pole double throw
unit that is all mechanical interlock. To explain the operation of
changing the positive to either A1 or A2, I will explain it as another
2 pole contactor with NO and NC contactors.
The Positive from the controller is connected to the NC and NO
contactors. The NO is connected to A2 and the NC is connected to A1.
While there is no power on this reversing contactor, S1 is connected
to A2 and the positive is connected to A1 for one direction or should
be the forward direction.
While there is power to this reversing contactor, S1 is connected to
A2 and the positive power is connected to A1 for the other direction
or should be for reversed.
You only want the reversing contactor energized in the reversed
direction and off in the forward direction.
Before you change directions, you should let up on the power to the
controller, which in some controllers, drop off the main contactor,
come to a stop and then go into reversed. In this way, you are
operating this reversing contactor not under load.
Roland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
well it looks really cool to me, glad to see it resurrected.
I find the Sparrow to look, well, funky.
Have you seen the Nike One? Fun to race it in GT, would like to see one
as electric instead of "human" powered in 2012. :)
http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/top-Nike-ONE-Gran-Turismo.htm
Jack
Jay Caplan wrote:
Here's a mention of who designed it in clay: Goes back to 1991 as gas
engined design. Not new at all, just planned as an electrified version.
"Stringer built a full-size, two-seat performance road car called the Qui
Moto to demonstrate just how clay modeling is accomplished. Not intended for
production, the car was built as a theme for a sports tourer of the future
that would lean into a turn like a motorcycle. It would use active
suspension, a motorcycle engine, and a Kevlar and carbon fiber composite
body over a honey- comb and aluminum monocoque chassis tub." from
http://www.chavant.com/new_site/files/pdf/chavant_news01.pdf
http://www.3wheelers.com/projgal4.html
---- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Ang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: Was: Patent revocation, Now: Myers Motors Qui Moto
Qui Moto is a concept vehicle, a 2-seater tandem sitting. It is now
at the San Francisco Auto Show. In fact, I was just there this
afternoon.
On 11/18/06, Jay Snable <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Ed,
Your post led me to revisit the AIR Lab site, then Myers. What the
heck is the Qui Moto?! I knew they were working on a next generation
but I haven't seen any mention until I stumbled upon this:
http://www.myersmotors.com/Poster4.htm
Jay
On Nov 18, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Edward Ang wrote:
On 11/17/06, Ben Apollonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, no, NiMH can't be used for EV's. Period.
I had to jump in now. Are you saying our Nimh powered Sparrow that
has been running since Jan is not real? Many on this list have seen
it in person. We now have 3 Nimh powered Sparrows on the road.
See www.airlabcorp.com for details.
Yes, you cannot parallel Nimh cells without a management system. But,
wait, we have a mangement system!
--
Edward Ang
President
AIR Lab Corp
--
Edward Ang
President
AIR Lab Corp
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's also possible to parallel Nimh without electronics, if you are
willing to be the BMS.
I paralleled a total of 1140 cells in 5 packs without any paralleling
issues. But it was time consuming for me each week. So having some
hardware do the work for you it what it takes for best reliability.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Edward Ang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I just want to clarify the mis-infomation circling in the recent posts
> here. We have designed and tested management system for using Nimh
> cells in parallel. It works and it is currently being used on the
> road everyday. It is called the GAIA I.
>
> See www.airlabcorp.com for details.
>
> You CANNOT use Nimh cells in parallel without a management system.
> AND, WE HAVE DEVELOPED SUCH A SYSTEM. SO, STOP SAYING IT IS NOT
> POSSIBLE TO USE SMALL NIMH CELLS IN EV'S UNTIL YOU HAVE DONE YOUR
> HOMEWORK!
>
> --
> Edward Ang
> President
> AIR Lab Corp
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]>
Subject: re: Transmission vs no transmission
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 08:04:53 -0800
You might find some data points on this in the archive. here are my
thoughts.
"It Depends"
If you have something that can bring down the motor rpm's during the
shift (like an alternator with the field tied to a switch on the clutch
pedel) then you can shift as fast as in an ICE. If not you either hammer
the driveline or you wait 2-4 seconds to shift.
Jeff- is this true even if the clutch is being used, or are you talking
about clutchless shifting? ( as far as the 2-4 second wait)
Thanks,
Phil
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Shopping has everything on your holiday list. Get expert picks by style,
age, and price. Try it!
http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8000,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200601&tcode=wlmtagline
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 11/19/06, Bob Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Snable" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:43 PM
Subject: Was: Patent revocation, Now: Myers Motors Qui Moto
> Hi Ed,
>
> Your post led me to revisit the AIR Lab site, then Myers. What the
> heck is the Qui Moto?! I knew they were working on a next generation
> but I haven't seen any mention until I stumbled upon this:
>
> http://www.myersmotors.com/Poster4.htm
>
> Jay
>
> On Nov 18, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Edward Ang wrote:
>
> > On 11/17/06, Ben Apollonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> So, no, NiMH can't be used for EV's. Period.
> >
> > I had to jump in now. Are you saying our Nimh powered Sparrow that
> > has been running since Jan is not real? Many on this list have seen
> > it in person. We now have 3 Nimh powered Sparrows on the road.
> >
> > See www.airlabcorp.com for details.
> >
> > Yes, you cannot parallel Nimh cells without a management system. But,
> > wait, we have a mangement system!
> >
> > --
> > Edward Ang
> > President
> > AIR Lab Corp
> >
> Hi Ed;
Very nice website, AirLab, Your on the right track with the Nimh
stuff. It is all in the battery managment system. Eight dollar word for
charger, but needed to run Nimh's!No more Bad Boys an' 'stench chords!How
are the Sparrows doing? Must get 100 miles per charge?Maybe their still in
experimation? So ya can't really say?
Actually, about 50 miles, we run out of room on the Sparrow. And, the
system would not let you use more than about 80% DOD. It would shut
off its output to prevent any intentional or unintentional damage.
Each module is a self-contained high voltage unit much like the Prius
pack. Charging and discharging is via different paths. So, the
system is able to completely isolate itself from the user if it is not
happy.
We could pack the cells tighter still for a higher energy density.
How do ya get around the Chevron Held Patent?
> Can you come up with cells that are a tad different enough to get away
with it?But all this technology seems to be out of the Common Man's reach,
for now?I can't see an issue paralleling these things WITH the battery
Balencer thing on?
There is no patent issue. We are using small cells and the licenses
of our suppliers were granted prior to Chevron's taking over. No
limitation applied to usage in propulsion either.
More Power to ya!
Bob Led Sled builder!
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.7/537 - Release Date: 11/17/06
>
>
--
Edward Ang
President
AIR Lab Corp
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If we are talking funky, 3 wheels, and fun to drive. Then I would like to
see the carver made into an EV. It is awesome!
http://www.carver-worldwide.com/SubItem/SubItem.asp?S_ID=21&nc=1
Curtis Muhlestein
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Murray
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 11:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Myers Motors Qui Moto
well it looks really cool to me, glad to see it resurrected.
I find the Sparrow to look, well, funky.
Have you seen the Nike One? Fun to race it in GT, would like to see one
as electric instead of "human" powered in 2012. :)
http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/top-Nike-ONE-Gran-Turismo.htm
Jack
Jay Caplan wrote:
> Here's a mention of who designed it in clay: Goes back to 1991 as gas
> engined design. Not new at all, just planned as an electrified version.
> "Stringer built a full-size, two-seat performance road car called the Qui
> Moto to demonstrate just how clay modeling is accomplished. Not intended
for
> production, the car was built as a theme for a sports tourer of the future
> that would lean into a turn like a motorcycle. It would use active
> suspension, a motorcycle engine, and a Kevlar and carbon fiber composite
> body over a honey- comb and aluminum monocoque chassis tub." from
> http://www.chavant.com/new_site/files/pdf/chavant_news01.pdf
>
> http://www.3wheelers.com/projgal4.html
>
> ---- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Edward Ang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Was: Patent revocation, Now: Myers Motors Qui Moto
>
>
>
>>Qui Moto is a concept vehicle, a 2-seater tandem sitting. It is now
>>at the San Francisco Auto Show. In fact, I was just there this
>>afternoon.
>>
>>On 11/18/06, Jay Snable <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Ed,
>>>
>>>Your post led me to revisit the AIR Lab site, then Myers. What the
>>>heck is the Qui Moto?! I knew they were working on a next generation
>>>but I haven't seen any mention until I stumbled upon this:
>>>
>>>http://www.myersmotors.com/Poster4.htm
>>>
>>>Jay
>>>
>>>On Nov 18, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Edward Ang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 11/17/06, Ben Apollonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>So, no, NiMH can't be used for EV's. Period.
>>>>
>>>>I had to jump in now. Are you saying our Nimh powered Sparrow that
>>>>has been running since Jan is not real? Many on this list have seen
>>>>it in person. We now have 3 Nimh powered Sparrows on the road.
>>>>
>>>>See www.airlabcorp.com for details.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, you cannot parallel Nimh cells without a management system. But,
>>>>wait, we have a mangement system!
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Edward Ang
>>>>President
>>>>AIR Lab Corp
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>Edward Ang
>>President
>>AIR Lab Corp
>>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thank you, David. I couldn't have said it better.
The misinormation I was trying to correct was that many kept saying we
will never see a Nimh powered EV on the road. But, we have put 3 on
the road now! And, we are continuing to put more on the road.
Simply put, are we better off not having Tesla Motors, Myers Motors,
AIR Lab etc. and keep doing what the EV hobbyists have been doing over
the last 30 years? At this moment, if a company starts its business
by focusing on the small EV hobbyist market, it is likely that it will
go out-of-business before a significant number of EV's are put on the
road. Or, it will just give up trying. There are too many examples
to count.
But, if a few companies work together, we might just put enough units
on the road to bring the cost down to benefit the hobbyists. Also, if
we show that companies could make money in EV's, I assure you others
would jump in and competitions will benefit everyone.
Bruce, how about you hire a group of engineers to design a system for
the EV hobbyist market and swallow the R&D cost and sell the system at
cost? If you think you can't do that, why should you think others
could? Worse, if you try to do that, you are preventing others from
making money by undercutting them. Do you think you are helping?
On 11/19/06, David Roden (Akron OH USA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 19 Nov 2006 at 5:56, Bruce Weisenberger wrote:
> I am tire of all the great
> technology being presented and then not being
> available to anyone but a select few or in the
> experimental stage.
I suppose we all are, but that's the way it is. Maybe it would be better if we
just didn't hear about these developments that we can't have. ;-)
I'm sure that at least one of the EV parts vendors will chime in here, but it's
a
sad fact of life that we EV hobbyists represent one of the most demanding
(costly) and least profitable markets for vendors.
We require lots of hand-holding (which costs vendors time and money).
Worse, we're spoiled by high levels of customer service from mass market
retailers (often delivered with $8 per hour or less labor). We expect someone
at the other end of the phone 24 hours a day. We raise hell if an EV parts
vendor doesn't provide the same level of service with their $100 per hour
engineers and their $30 per hour techs. I see people complaining about this
on the EV list every week.
And of course we want the parts to be as cheap as possible - ideally about
the same as we pay for ICE parts. In an era when we can buy a desktop
computer for $300 (!), it's something of a shock to see prices that actually
and accurately reflect the cost of engineering and production amortized over
a few hundred units, instead of a few hundred thousand or million. That's why
controllers and chargers can easily cost $5-10k each.
My hat's off to folks like Rich, Otmar, and Victor. They're building, selling,
and supporting EV parts at prices that are tough to sustain. We'll be lucky if
they don't burn out doing this. I don't think they get enough recognition for
what they do.
And they are a rarity. Most people understandably want to make a good
living without having to spend, effectively, 24 hours a day on the job. How
about you?
Many of the parts we use in our EVs were designed for other purposes -
forklifts, industrial vehicles, boats, and even various ICEs. Their relatively
low
cost is made possible by - you guessed it - mass production. EV hobbyists
are NOT a mass market, but some of the above markets are (relatively
speaking). We get to ride along.
When some industrial vehicle manufacturer, golf car builder, or even an
automaker contracts with Edward's company to buy a quantity of his NiMH
modules, then we'll have an in. We'll eventually be able to buy them from
that user or automaker as spares. Who knows, a few years down the road
they may even be available at Autozone as remanufactured parts.
I don't speak for Edward, but my guess is that if you want them before then,
all you have to do is find a way to make it worth his while financially to build
them for you.
--
Edward Ang
President
AIR Lab Corp
--- End Message ---
