EV Digest 6242
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: How big is this motor?
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) ASCII Woes
by Tom Gocze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Maximum grip lowest rolling resistance?
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: How big is this motor?
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Topping off lead acid batteries
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6) Re: Maximum grip lowest rolling resistance?
by "David O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: ASCII Woes
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: ASCII Woes
by "David O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) "Ping Pong" Charger (was: 180 V charger)
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: EV digest 6240
by "Matthew Drobnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: EV digest 6240
by MARK DUTKO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Maximum grip lowest rolling resistance?
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: How big is this motor?
by Steve Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Rudman regs & a Soniel charger.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Maximum amps for Anderson 350?
by Steve Condie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Maximum amps for Anderson 350?
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) A123 packs was Re: What would be a good battery configuration.
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
18) Re: Battey Beach Burnout
by Lawrence Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Santa needs a PHEV before next year....
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
20) Re: 180 V charger
by "David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: ASCII Woes
by "David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Holiday Wishes
by Steven Lough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: How big is this motor?
by Jeff Major <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Looks to me like a 140-07-4001, or maybe a A00-4009;
both by Advanced DC. These are 6 HP motors. 18-30 HP
motors, operating 72-144V are more common for a small
vehicle.
I have an 8" ADC for sale, if interested, depending on
where you are located.
peace,
--- Eduardo Kaftanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can I bug a bit more? (I am still a newbie)
>
> Is this motor:
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=130060394713
>
> Big enough for a small car? Usable on 72 or 96
> volts?
>
> thanks :)
>
>
>
> --
> Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
> http://www.carfun.cl | Murphy, la oportunidad.
> http://e.nn.cl |
> | Yo.
>
>
Converting a gen. 5 Honda Civic? My $20 video/DVD
has my '92 sedan, as well as a del Sol and hatch too!
Learn more at:
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Merry Christmas,
I know I am not the brightest bulb on the chain, but am I missing
something when it comes to reading ASCII art.
I really appreciate what is posted and want to understand the
schematics, but I cannot usually make heads nor tails out of it.
Is there a way to view this other than what comes through on the
Digest??
Hope everyone has a fine Holiday, what ever you celebrate.
Tom Gocze
in a snow-less, Globally warmed?? Maine
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry, I can't point you to an authoritive answer. I just recall reading
that at some point.
Personally, I think trying to buy a LRR by guessing is a poor way to go.
I see lots of folks say things like "buy high pressure tires for LRR" or
"Buy truck tires because they have a higher load rating" or "select a tire
with a square contact patch", etc.
You might get lucky and get a LRR tire that way, but I doubt it.
Personally I think your best bet is to search for someone who has tested
tires for LRR, or check with the manufacturer (this can be difficult), or
test them yourself.
There used to be a fellow working at Goodyear that you could email with
the details about your vehicle (weight on each tire, wheel size, etc.) and
he would tell you which tire Goodyear makes that would be your best choice
for LRR. Wouldn't neccesarily be the lowest RR tire from any
manufacturer, but at least it would be the best from Goodyear.
Perhaps someone on the list will have his email address, I've lost it at
some point.
> Peter ( and GW)
>
>
> That theory ( most efficient tire patch is about square) would explain the
> two viewpoints.
>
>
> But, can you tell me why you think that (square) patch shape is optimum?
> It's not obvious to me.
>
>
> It looks like you're quoting someone else's post about that point
>
> "From what I understand, to optimize RR you want a contact patch that is
>>about the same length and width"
>
> but, for some reason, I haven't seen that particular post. Is it from an
> earlier discussion of tire RR?
>
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>>From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: [email protected]
>>To: [email protected]
>>Subject: Re: Maximum grip lowest rolling resistance?
>>Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 22:48:08 -0700 (MST)
>>
>>
>>Actually, I believe you are both appoaching the problem from different
>>directions.
>>
>> >From what I understand, to optimize RR you want a contact patch that is
>>about the same length and width.
>>
>>Bicycle tires tend to have long narrow contact patches, so wider tires
>>have lower RR.
>>
>>On the other hand, the low profile and wide car tires, that are popular
>>now, tend to have a short and wide contact patch, so using narrower tires
>>is better.
>>
>> >>The width of the tire (not the contact patch) and air pressure
>>determines
>> >>most of the rolling resistance.
>> >>
>> >>So the more narrow the wheel generally the less resistance but the
>> >> profile
>> >>should be square to the road.
>> >
>> > Hi, GW
>> >
>> > Can you tell me why you think this is so ( that narrower tires have
>>lower
>> > RR)? Other people here have said that also, but I'm looking for some
>> > technical justification or reliable reference.
>> >
>> > For bicycle tires ( I ride a recumbent, and recumbent riders, in
>>general,
>> > are quite concerned with tire RR) most everyone believes that, for a
>>given
>> > tire pressure, wider tires have lower rolling resistance. I wonder if
>> > (and
>> > why) it might be different for car tires.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Phil
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Type your favorite song. Get a customized station. Try MSN Radio powered
> by Pandora. http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001
>
>
--
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 ---
This motor most likely has a splined output shaft which makes it much more
difficult to adapt to a flywheel hub. You could confirm if is does indeed
have a splined output by writing the seller. Most likely Jim from High
Torque will know this off the top of his head. Depending on how fast you
wish to go this motor may power a very small car. The motor Bob has for sale
would be more than sufficient.
Roderick Wilde
EV Parts, Inc.
www.evparts.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eduardo Kaftanski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 6:44 AM
Subject: How big is this motor?
Can I bug a bit more? (I am still a newbie)
Is this motor:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=130060394713
Big enough for a small car? Usable on 72 or 96 volts?
thanks :)
--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
http://www.carfun.cl | Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date:
12/24/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date: 12/24/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Lee excellent information and delivery !,But you new I was going to
ask you to elaborate on the pulse charging technique didn't you / !!!!
I have enough skill and hardware to pulse at 20mS and what I would like to
know is how long to leave between the pulses.....I take it averaging the
current over time would be acceptable ....what I mean is pulse for 20mS and off
for 60mS to get a 25% current average ? Or is there a likely benefit ot having
longer periods between pulses, perhaps in order to let the chemistry 'do it's
thing'...so to speak
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev/post?postID=CXLZsYZAo_aIO-Uf3IdcgdE-zexjg7sghgjrx-usO5dVLbCmYV6_skSSW1k3eeAdozwOYLjogQCzJw)
wrote:
> I understand the idea... bulk charging to 80% whatever condition
> the battery is in... then a slower charge rate to finish with.
> Does this finish charge absolutely need to be a constant current
> or a constant voltage cycle? Or could I pulse switch my charger?
Lead-acids are fairly tolerant of how you charge them, as long as you
avoid too high a peak voltage. Think of it like filling a bucket with a
garden hose. When the bucket is mostly empty, you can squirt in the
water almost as fast as you like, and it won't splash out. But as it
approaches "full", you have slow down and be more careful, or you'll
make a mess. The best plan is to slow down as you approach full, and
"sneak up" to 100% with a very slow trickle.
> For example, is it permissible to charge at 40A for 1 second and
> then have no charge for the next three seconds?
What would happen if hit that bucket with a fire hose for 1 second, and
then allowed several seconds for the water to calm down before hitting
it again? You'd splash water all over the place!
Same with a battery. The high peak current will drive the voltage well
past the gassing point even if applied for 1 second. Some chargers get
away with "pulse charging" by using extremely brief pulses, like a
single half-cycle of the AC line (16-20 msec).
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My guess is that the reason the square shaped contact patch is ideal (or
near ideal) is that with the skinny long patch there is more deflection of
the tire as Roland described. With the wider short patch the frontal area of
the tire begins to add to the vehicles frontal area which adds to air
resistance.
I vaguely remember reading that skinnier tires were the last modification
that allowed for a new land speed record, although that of course is the
extreme end of things. It wouldn't be the first time that racing leads to
learning what works and what doesn't.
When I think of bicycle racing, the guys doing road racing use very skinny
tires with very high PSI. They're all about LRR and aerodynamics and weight
since they are the power plant.
Dave O.
On 12/24/06, Phil Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter ( and GW)
That theory ( most efficient tire patch is about square) would explain the
two viewpoints.
But, can you tell me why you think that (square) patch shape is optimum?
It's not obvious to me.
It looks like you're quoting someone else's post about that point
"From what I understand, to optimize RR you want a contact patch that is
>about the same length and width"
but, for some reason, I haven't seen that particular post. Is it from an
earlier discussion of tire RR?
Phil
>From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: Maximum grip lowest rolling resistance?
>Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 22:48:08 -0700 (MST)
>
>
>Actually, I believe you are both appoaching the problem from different
>directions.
>
> >From what I understand, to optimize RR you want a contact patch that is
>about the same length and width.
>
>Bicycle tires tend to have long narrow contact patches, so wider tires
>have lower RR.
>
>On the other hand, the low profile and wide car tires, that are popular
>now, tend to have a short and wide contact patch, so using narrower tires
>is better.
>
> >>The width of the tire (not the contact patch) and air pressure
>determines
> >>most of the rolling resistance.
> >>
> >>So the more narrow the wheel generally the less resistance but the
> >> profile
> >>should be square to the road.
> >
> > Hi, GW
> >
> > Can you tell me why you think this is so ( that narrower tires have
>lower
> > RR)? Other people here have said that also, but I'm looking for some
> > technical justification or reliable reference.
> >
> > For bicycle tires ( I ride a recumbent, and recumbent riders, in
>general,
> > are quite concerned with tire RR) most everyone believes that, for a
>given
> > tire pressure, wider tires have lower rolling resistance. I wonder if
> > (and
> > why) it might be different for car tires.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Phil
>
_________________________________________________________________
Type your favorite song. Get a customized station. Try MSN Radio powered
by Pandora. http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Tom,
To read the ASCII diagrams, just click reply so you can edit the ASCII text.
If it is all out of place, than put the cursor on the that line of text and
either press backspace or space bar, so you can realign each character on
each line.
The older computers back in the 70's had extra 64 symbols that you could
actual type up a schematic or block diagrams right on the keyboards, but it
had to be sent to another computer with the same hardware to view it.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Gocze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: ASCII Woes
> Merry Christmas,
> I know I am not the brightest bulb on the chain, but am I missing
> something when it comes to reading ASCII art.
> I really appreciate what is posted and want to understand the
> schematics, but I cannot usually make heads nor tails out of it.
> Is there a way to view this other than what comes through on the
> Digest??
>
> Hope everyone has a fine Holiday, what ever you celebrate.
>
> Tom Gocze
> in a snow-less, Globally warmed?? Maine
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Copy and paste to notepad and choose a font that has fixed width characters
such as "Courier New" which I believe is the default.
Dave O.
On 12/24/06, Tom Gocze <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
Merry Christmas,
I know I am not the brightest bulb on the chain, but am I missing
something when it comes to reading ASCII art.
I really appreciate what is posted and want to understand the
schematics, but I cannot usually make heads nor tails out of it.
Is there a way to view this other than what comes through on the
Digest??
Hope everyone has a fine Holiday, what ever you celebrate.
Tom Gocze
in a snow-less, Globally warmed?? Maine
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One way to get more than 160 volts out of a simple "Bad Boy" charger
is to center tap the pack, connect one lead of the Variac to that
point, then put two diodes on the other lead of the Variac. One diode
goes to each end of the pack. Each half cycle charges one end of the pack.
Bill Dube'
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seth,
It's going in a 2000 Lincoln LS. About 3800 lbs weight in gas form, with a
near empty gas tank. (Someone had theirs weighed on 4 wheel scales)
There was an offer posted a little while ago for an "RFE drivetrain", which
in it's original form was 2 AC55s and controllers in a bus. The seller wants
to sell them individually, but I want to get a price on an original
setup...1 motor comes no where near the original performance of the gas
engine, but 2 is workable, with adjusting to the transmission shift points.
(I have a tuning package which allows me complete control over the car's ECU
/ TCU)
I plan on coupling the two motors to an automatic transmission, and keeping
the torque convertor locked as much as possible. (Basically almost all of
the time except 1st gear, the logic doesn't allow locking in 1st, except for
a 'overheating' strategy which locks it shortly after 10 MPH in first.)
There was also some information posted about NiMH battery packs, which I was
also planning on using. They're 120V 9Ah blocks, and I was going to get 12
of them. Originally I had read 10C was the max discharge, but apparently it
was 10C is max continuous, with 20C burst. I was originally planning on 240V
* 54 Ah, but I may do 360V * 36 Ah, as it allows up to 360A continuous, and
720A burst, which is more then enough for 2 controllers. Unfortunately, I
can't do 336V because of the way the packs are configured. Will 360V be a
problem?
Thanks for your help,
-Matt
On 12/24/06, Seth Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/23/06, Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>
> EV Digest 6240
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Dual AC55 setup, coupler...
> by "Matthew Drobnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 2) Re: A couple of EV's on trading post
> by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <snip>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 19:02:42 -0500
> From: "Matthew Drobnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Dual AC55 setup, coupler...
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Hi all. I'm looking into the Solectria AC55 based system (RFE
drivetrain)
> that was posted on the EVDL about a week or so ago. Two questions:
>
> How much do you think the dual motor setup is worth?
>
> Who can create a coupler to couple it to the input shaft of a
> transmission?
>
> I figure between that system, and the NiMH battery info that was posted
a
> few weeks ago...It'd make a nice conversion for me. :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Matt
>
Matt- I don't follow the EVDL much, only occasionally by digest. I used to
work at Solectria, and the AC55 was my favorite motor. I wanted to put one
in my VW golf. It would have been a tight fit, but worthwhile, I think.
Probably any *decent* machine shop can make a coupler, if you know what
you
need.
As for the setup. You need a motor and the Solectria controller. I am not
sure what was offered. And a battery pack from 288-336V. What sort of
vehicle are you going to install this in? I had the battery pack for it
(but
sold it) made of BB600 cells.
Let me know more about what you might want to do and I can lend a little
more advice if you want. My private e-mail might be best as I don't watch
the EVDL much.
Seth
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Check with electro auto- You may also want to ask them about the AC
90 single motor and controller- good for very heavy vehicles and you
could use one motor.
M
On Dec 24, 2006, at 10:01 AM, Matthew Drobnak wrote:
Seth,
It's going in a 2000 Lincoln LS. About 3800 lbs weight in gas form,
with a
near empty gas tank. (Someone had theirs weighed on 4 wheel scales)
There was an offer posted a little while ago for an "RFE
drivetrain", which
in it's original form was 2 AC55s and controllers in a bus. The
seller wants
to sell them individually, but I want to get a price on an original
setup...1 motor comes no where near the original performance of the
gas
engine, but 2 is workable, with adjusting to the transmission shift
points.
(I have a tuning package which allows me complete control over the
car's ECU
/ TCU)
I plan on coupling the two motors to an automatic transmission, and
keeping
the torque convertor locked as much as possible. (Basically almost
all of
the time except 1st gear, the logic doesn't allow locking in 1st,
except for
a 'overheating' strategy which locks it shortly after 10 MPH in
first.)
There was also some information posted about NiMH battery packs,
which I was
also planning on using. They're 120V 9Ah blocks, and I was going to
get 12
of them. Originally I had read 10C was the max discharge, but
apparently it
was 10C is max continuous, with 20C burst. I was originally
planning on 240V
* 54 Ah, but I may do 360V * 36 Ah, as it allows up to 360A
continuous, and
720A burst, which is more then enough for 2 controllers.
Unfortunately, I
can't do 336V because of the way the packs are configured. Will
360V be a
problem?
Thanks for your help,
-Matt
On 12/24/06, Seth Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/23/06, Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>
> EV Digest 6240
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Dual AC55 setup, coupler...
> by "Matthew Drobnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 2) Re: A couple of EV's on trading post
> by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <snip>
> Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 19:02:42 -0500
> From: "Matthew Drobnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Dual AC55 setup, coupler...
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Hi all. I'm looking into the Solectria AC55 based system (RFE
drivetrain)
> that was posted on the EVDL about a week or so ago. Two questions:
>
> How much do you think the dual motor setup is worth?
>
> Who can create a coupler to couple it to the input shaft of a
> transmission?
>
> I figure between that system, and the NiMH battery info that was
posted
a
> few weeks ago...It'd make a nice conversion for me. :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Matt
>
Matt- I don't follow the EVDL much, only occasionally by digest. I
used to
work at Solectria, and the AC55 was my favorite motor. I wanted to
put one
in my VW golf. It would have been a tight fit, but worthwhile, I
think.
Probably any *decent* machine shop can make a coupler, if you know
what
you
need.
As for the setup. You need a motor and the Solectria controller. I
am not
sure what was offered. And a battery pack from 288-336V. What sort of
vehicle are you going to install this in? I had the battery pack
for it
(but
sold it) made of BB600 cells.
Let me know more about what you might want to do and I can lend a
little
more advice if you want. My private e-mail might be best as I
don't watch
the EVDL much.
Seth
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to all,
When I became an engineer for Michelin in 1969, I had
trouble figuring why steel radials lasted for 86,000
miles (average) on American cars compared to typical
quality tires that averaged only 25% of that.
The salesmen and engineers all told me different
things like:
1) amount of carbon black in the compound
2) the number of plys (layers of cord)
3) the tread thickness
4) the weight
5) the placement of the weight from the hub
6) the type of rubber
The funny thing was that I couldn't understand the
cause from their backup data and charts and "proof".
It was all not adding up.
The Michelins were often smaller or narrower and often
weighed more, but lasted 4 times as long and got 8%
better fuel mileage and yet cornered and stopped
better, but didn't accelerate any better.
The cornering was much better, but the breaking point
during to (almost) slide was very difficult to
anticipate, as it happened almost without warning.
On a traditional tire you could hear a slight squeal,
then louder, then louder, then louder, then start to
drift, then eventually slip into a slide predictably.
The Michelin took the corner about 20% faster without
a sound, but at the slide point slipped into a slide
very fast.
At any rate, it took me about 2 years to finally
understand why "radial" tires were able to perform so
much better. The secret was that the tread was
virtually unbendable, while the sidewall was very
flexible.
That allowed for no rolling resistance or friction or
treadwear, yet delivered a soft ride. That also
produced the side effect of tires that appeared half
flat and users that increased their air pressure to
make them more "normal" thereby getting a harsher
ride. Even at the correct air pressure, they gave a
different "ride" and suspensions were modified by OEM.
Michelin invented the steel radial in 1948 and
offshore vehicles had them standard for many years.
The Lincoln was the first US carmaker to standardize
on steel radials in about 1971.
After playing with one inch cross sections cuts of
many brands of tires, I finally figured it out. The
Michelins were totally unbendable in the tread area,
but almost all other brands and thicknesses were
bendable to substantial degrees. Eventually, Pirelli
and Bridgestone adopted even more steel and exceeded
the mileage of Michelins for awhile.
The sidewall was the reverse. Michelin was very
bendable while most others were fairly (or very)
stiff.
When the first Goodyear, Firestone, Goodrich, and
Uniroyal "steel" radials were produced, they put such
a small amount of steel in the tread that they did not
produce tread stiffness, nor did they get significant
benefits. It was later disclosed that no one but
Michelin was able to bond steel to rubber effectively
so the alternative was to take a few rubber coated
strands of steel and bond the "rubber to rubber".
At any rate, most of the tire makers have improved
drastically, yet very few tires can match them in any
application that Michelin provides.
I know this sounds like a advertisement promo, but we
get no breaks or income from them. We only buy them
whenever possible (at wholesale prices).
The secret is unbendable tread with flexible
sidewalls. Take a bandsaw and cut a few sections of
tread a prove it to yourself.
Hope this helps,
Jay Lashlee 949-497-3600
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'd say too small, even for a small car. It's about the size of the one from
my 70 Saab Sonett EV. Way too small to be usable at traffic speeds, but good
up to about 35 MPH max.
Steve
Roderick Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This motor most likely has a splined output shaft which makes it much more
difficult to adapt to a flywheel hub. You could confirm if is does indeed
have a splined output by writing the seller. Most likely Jim from High
Torque will know this off the top of his head. Depending on how fast you
wish to go this motor may power a very small car. The motor Bob has for sale
would be more than sufficient.
Roderick Wilde
EV Parts, Inc.
www.evparts.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eduardo Kaftanski"
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 6:44 AM
Subject: How big is this motor?
>
> Can I bug a bit more? (I am still a newbie)
>
> Is this motor:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=130060394713
>
> Big enough for a small car? Usable on 72 or 96 volts?
>
> thanks :)
>
>
>
> --
> Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
> http://www.carfun.cl | Murphy, la oportunidad.
> http://e.nn.cl |
> | Yo.
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date:
> 12/24/2006
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date: 12/24/2006
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seems the Soniel 48v charger has three charge levels.55v 58v and one
slightly higher. I noticed my batteries were charging at 14.75 early in the
cycle. NOt badly balanced I noticed 58.32vdc without regs. & eventully
stopping of charge. I'd have one battery(at end of charge) that was
charging slightly lower. 13.5 vs maybe one battery over 14v and the others
maybe 13.75. I now have them all around 13.8 but this happened when I added
the regs. Seems that when the charger sensed the regs it cut back from 58.32
to 55.23. It still hasn't stopped charging & this is all now done on a
full charge. I'm getting a bad feeling that these old rev d & C regs won't
work with this charger on the bulk charge and still balance at the end of
charge. The charger charges higher first and cools off later. I'm using
these on a Lepton scooter with 4 BB 50 ah batteries. Maybe the answer is to
just use the regs at end of charge only. But that is a pain. Lawrence
Rhodes.....
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In the design I'm working up for my Tropica I'm hoping to be able to have the
ability to have more than one battery pack and swap them quickly. The Trop has
a battery tunnel down the middle. The original design had 12, 6V flooded
batteries which could be removed for maintenance or replacement by sliding them
out the front of the car after a fairly elaborate disassembly - including
removing the steering mechnism. At the cost of about 20% of the battery weight
I'm planning to use 12, 12V AGM's which can slide out the back instead, which
should require no disassembly at all. Being able to disconnect the packs with
a simple Anderson connector would help that process. My concern is this: The
largest Anderson connectors I've seen are rated for 350 amps. Current may
spike above that briefly in ordinary driving. If I try to push things (and why
not?) the current may stay above that for a little while. Will that be a
problem? How much current can the connectors reasonably
handle?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Steve, you can download the PDF data sheets for the SB350s here:
http://www.andersonpower.com/products/multipole-sb.html We use them in
racing with Zilla Z2Ks. Depending on the size of the cable you are using
they can handle a thousand amps for a few seconds. You did not state what
controller you are using so it may not even be worth thinking about if you
are using a Curtis. I assume you will be using these solely in the battery
side which means they will be subject to higher amps less frequently and for
shorter durations.
Roderick Wilde
EV Parts, Inc.
www.evparts.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Condie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 11:18 AM
Subject: Maximum amps for Anderson 350?
In the design I'm working up for my Tropica I'm hoping to be able to have
the ability to have more than one battery pack and swap them quickly. The
Trop has a battery tunnel down the middle. The original design had 12, 6V
flooded batteries which could be removed for maintenance or replacement by
sliding them out the front of the car after a fairly elaborate
disassembly - including removing the steering mechnism. At the cost of
about 20% of the battery weight I'm planning to use 12, 12V AGM's which
can slide out the back instead, which should require no disassembly at
all. Being able to disconnect the packs with a simple Anderson connector
would help that process. My concern is this: The largest Anderson
connectors I've seen are rated for 350 amps. Current may spike above that
briefly in ordinary driving. If I try to push things (and why not?) the
current may stay above that for a little while. Will that be a problem?
How much current can the connectors reasonably
handle?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date:
12/24/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date: 12/24/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The two options below would be my pick. You are correct the 13.2 volt 73.6
Ah would be very expensive around 1600 dollars. By the way unless the A123
battery was very steeply discounted these would cost as much as Valence
batteries or more.
The big advantage for the A123 cell and pack would be a single cell is it
can put out 70 amps continuously without damage.
_http://www.a123systems.com/html/products/buyKit.html_
(http://www.a123systems.com/html/products/buyKit.html)
On the flip side of that big advantage you need a BMS that can keep them
from being overcharged. This is already built into the Valence batteries.
Since
lithium batteries unlike lead acid and NiMH batteries can not be overcharged
to balance them
How do you plan to keep 1000 or 2000 cells balanced?
Don
In a message dated 12/23/2006 8:00:16 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have worked out a few options on balancing and monitoring and wanted
to ask the opinions of this list.
What would you people like to see.
Idea 1 : a 7"x5" footprint 8" high with one mounting hole down the
center at 13.2Vnominal and 36.8Ah. Consider it 1/2 an orbital. Two would
fit in the space of 1 orbital
Idea 3 : a " " 26.4V x 36.8Ah (Same
as two off the first just a little money and connections saved)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/23/2006 6:41:19 AM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I heard some of the conferences were cancelled. Is that right? What kind of
turn out are we expecting? I plan to be there. Anyone else?
Steve
Heidi and I will be there. Don't know about the conferences..??
Ken & Heidi
The last email I got from EAA said the conference was back on. It didn't
elaborate on
what the hold up was but it appears it is a go and to check with the FloridaEAA
web site
(floridaeaa.org) for details.
"The 6th EVer EAA Chapters
Conference is going to take place. The entire EAA Board of
Directors is in agreement in seeing the 6th EVer EAA Chapters
Conference move forward and wants to re-establish the 6th EVer as being
hosted by the Florida EAA Chapter. The 8 December 2006 cancellation
notice sent out is hereby rescinded. "
Lawrence
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's that time of year again.....keep the kids happy while you unwind with
some egg nog...lolol...or whatever you drink !
_www.noradsanta.org_ (http://www.noradsanta.org)
And Merry Christmas everyone !
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Other people have already pointed out the problems with the output. My only
comment is do not connect the capacitor and bridges to the Hot and Gnd.
Connect them to Hot and Neutral. Do not connect any load to the Gnd wire.
This wire is for safety only, not to carry any load current.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 8:50 PM
Subject: 180 V charger
Hi all,
I've come up with a charger for my 180 V system. It is a cross of a bad
boy and Lee's Bonn charger. I think my logic is right, but just to be
sure, I'm asking for feedback on how I can improve it.
Since my system is 180 v, a regular 120 v bad boy won't work. What I have
done is parallel a regular 120 v bad boy charger and the concept and
values of Lee's Bonn charger. A 120 bad boy with just a rectifier puts out
168v max so to get up to my 180 v for float/charge/equalize, I need 30, 53
and 66 more volts. I've paralleled Lee's Bonn Inductor (which may become a
Transformer) to get the required voltage. I may add more taps for the
ability to charge packs with less voltage to give me more flexibility.
Here is an ASCII schematic, as usual view it with a fixed font.... It is
too long for this email so I cut it in half.
___ D1
S1 | | S2 ____
Hot____/____| G |__/_____________o__ _|AC +|__________o_____
| | | | | | | |
120vac Neutral_____| F | C1_|_ | | | | | CONT -
| | --- Fan | | | |
Gnd_________| I |____|____|__o___|____|AC -|_______o__|_____
_|_ |___| | | |____| | |
/// | |- - - - | |
| | | | | |
| 30 53 66 | |
| o o o D2 | |
| \ ____ | |
| L1 o____|AC +|__|__|
| | | |
|_____________| |__o
|AC -|
|____|
Fuse _
____/\ ________________________________| |
\/ __|__ |+|
CONT - |Volts| | |Anderson
|150 -| | | Plug
| 250| | |
____ |_____| | |
_______|AMPS|________________|__________|-|
|0-15| |_|
|____|
S1 is a 15 amp breaker to turn everything off
S2 is a 240vac 20amp 0-12 hour mechanical timer. Can be set to maximum
charging time to automatically shut off when done.
C1 is a 5-10uf 220vac or more motor run capacitor.
D1 and D2 are bridge rectifiers, 400V 35 amp min.
L1 is the Inductor, or it may become a transformer that has taps which
will give me the values, 20v, 53v and 66v that I need.
The switch for the different voltages is a toggle switch, 120vac 15amp
minimum with at least 3 positions, maybe more depending on my
inductor/transformer taps (for more flexibility)
Fuse is a 250vdc 15 amp fuse.
Amp meter will read 0-15 amps
Volt meter will read 150-250 volts.
And lastly an Anderson connector.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/207 - Release Date: 12/19/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Even easier, change your mail viewer to display a fixed width font. In
Outlook Express, go to View, Text Size, Fixed.
I'm betting other programs have a similar function..
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: ASCII Woes
Hello Tom,
To read the ASCII diagrams, just click reply so you can edit the ASCII
text. If it is all out of place, than put the cursor on the that line of
text and either press backspace or space bar, so you can realign each
character on each line.
The older computers back in the 70's had extra 64 symbols that you could
actual type up a schematic or block diagrams right on the keyboards, but
it had to be sent to another computer with the same hardware to view it.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Gocze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: ASCII Woes
Merry Christmas,
I know I am not the brightest bulb on the chain, but am I missing
something when it comes to reading ASCII art.
I really appreciate what is posted and want to understand the
schematics, but I cannot usually make heads nor tails out of it.
Is there a way to view this other than what comes through on the
Digest??
Hope everyone has a fine Holiday, what ever you celebrate.
Tom Gocze
in a snow-less, Globally warmed?? Maine
--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/207 - Release Date: 12/19/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From our Home to Yours...
May your Christmas be full of Peace and Happiness... And the New
Year be more ELECTRAFIED than the Last.
Full of Wind and Solar Power, Bio-Fuels, Hybrids, PLUG-in Hybrids
and BEV,s of all kinds, from 5 ton Trucks to 500 watt E-Bikes... and
back again....
And don't forget the rechargable tooth brushes...!
--
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 ---
Hello Eduardo,
The motor P/N is MSS-4002, which was a Prestolite number for a 6.6 inch
diameter traction motor for daul drive fork lift. Brushes would have been set
to neutral, so higher voltage may require advance. Also, it is series wound,
over speed at low loads is concern. Also, spline shaft hard to adapt and I
think this design has a drive end bearing lubed from mating gearbox, so you
might have to replce it with a sealed bearing. Small car?????? How small?
How fast? This motor would similar to a golfcart motor, a little beefier and
ventilated.
Jeff Major
Eduardo Kaftanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Can I bug a bit more? (I am still a newbie)
Is this motor:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=130060394713
Big enough for a small car? Usable on 72 or 96 volts?
thanks :)
--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
http://www.carfun.cl | Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.
---------------------------------
Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.
--- End Message ---
