EV Digest 6263
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) The 1200V Zilla market
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Electric Isuzu, more
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Caps
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: AltairNano Completes ORDER to Phoenix Motorcar
by "Brandon Kruger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Homemade Hybrids and NEDRA, NHRA (was: Current Eliminator news)
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Current Eliminator news
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Caps
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) efficiency comparison - 2 speed gearbox or series/parallel
by "Robert Blasutig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Proprietary "pot" required for Curtis 1204-410 (was: Joe Sixpack
Geo: controlling motor with only 2 terminals)
by "Darin - MetroMPG.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: efficiency comparison - 2 speed gearbox or series/parallel
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: CG, Re: Gens in EV's, Re: Current Eliminator news
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: efficiency comparison - 2 speed gearbox or series/parallel
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: AltairNano Completes ORDER to Phoenix Motorcar
by "Kaido Kert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: [EV] Proprietary "pot" required for Curtis 1204-410 (was: Joe Sixpack
Geo: controlling motor with only 2 terminals)
by Eduardo Kaftanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Homemade Hybrids and NEDRA, NHRA (was: Current Eliminator news)
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Rats attacking EV wiring (was Hairball control wire sizing
by "Joseph H. Strubhar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: The 1200V Zilla market
by "Brandon Kruger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Rats attacking EV wiring (was Hairball control wire sizing
by "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Sure; 858 hp from the current model is really impressive, I agree.
What I wonder though is: would a 1200V model potentially appeal to
NASCAR, F1, etc. types? Could a model with this much power potential
spur additional interest and innovation?
As it is, the item in question does not exist. If it did exist; would
great things happen as a direct result of it existing?
What could be done with a 1200V Zilla that currently cannot be done?
Is there an existing non EV market that is electric that could and
would utilize this motor controller if it was available?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Havranek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: Electric Isuzu
> Thanks Bob -
>
> Good practical feed back on what to expect out the floodies.
> Just up and running as of July 06 with 18 - T-890's.
> I'm gentle with them but always looking for clues on just how much abuse
they can tolerate and what to expect from them.
>
> The recent discussions about the limits on voltage sag was also very
helpful.
>
> This helps.
>
> Dana
> Hi Dana;
Voltage sag? Yeah! You DON'T want it! Or at least as little as
possable.In my running the paramiters I mentioned I was running about 115
volts sag at those loads, 150-200 amps, toward 200 anps I was down to 110
volts or so. In my famous Joliet Brakestand pinned the 500 amp meter and
after things smoked up awile the amps dropped to 250 at 115 volts. I was
burning them with a fresh charge, on a wet parking lot at Pep Boys.Somebody
took a good vid shot and it was on Fox Valley's DVD Production " Electric
Ave"A darn good PARKING brake made it possable, too! I EVen outdid the White
Zombie, in the brakestand dept.The Brake stand drew about as much current as
going about 85 mph in 5th gear!I still think they shoulda chained Zombie and
Joule Injected together for a hellatiouis smoke show!?Joule woulda probably
have pulled the 12 lb Zombie backward with ease? But it sure would have been
a great smoke show!!Winner coulda pulled Aggrivated Battery, in another tire
scorcher!Ah! the memories of Joliet<g>!
OK Back to the story; When you get YOUR Jewel up and running, ya want to
FIND those voltage sag points. It is the amps YOU are paying for so ya want
to get them all! Drive it hard, then feel around. Any bum connection will be
hot! That's power wasting away! Think a leaky old garden hose, trying to
fill a swimming pool and water is squirting all over the place instead of in
the pool.You will be surprised at how many hot ones ya find , just starting
out!! Don't be happy with 10-15 volts sag, Unless your batteries are real
crappy, you shouldn't lose many volts!As much as I am a soldering lugs sort
of guy I had soldered lugs that got HOT, too. A simple resolder usually took
care of that.I'll be starting a flame war here about soldering is better
than crimping. But if BOTH are done right you SHOULDN'T have a voltage drop
issue here. EVerything stone cold after your hellacious burnouts an'
brakestands ,etc<g>!? I babble on about this stuff as you go about running
your new EV you want to "Clean " it up in this way. A few volts sag is very
noticable, when you and the car get used to each other. Then you will have
a"Gut" feeling when somthing is not right.
> My two amps worth.
Bob
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Hi Tom;
> >
> > I'll take a stab at your battery life estimate. I ran a 120 volt
Rabbit,
> > with a ADC 9" motor ans DCP Rapture controller, used to pull 150-200
amps to
> > go down the freeway at 60-70 mpg, every day on a 26 mile each way
commute. I
> > got about 20 thousand miles on a pak of T 145's, about 21K on a pak of
> > 105's. I beat the shit out of them, though, with 4-500 amp turnpike
> > launches. I WILL NOT come on a freway at 25-30 mph and expect ANYBODY to
let
> > me in!!Ya hafta cram it into 4th and floor it to get on at 50-60 mph or
> > better.Toward the end of the batteries life I was replacing individual
> > batteries that just died of old age, or cell reversal. Believe me, ya
sure
> > find the bum ones driving like that. EVerything from a warm one to a
full
> > blown "Trojan Teakettle" Boiling ,frothing ,reversed cell! Battery is
junk,
> > at this point!But as they all aged together, failure is almost
contagious!?
> > "well, if HE can go, so can I" and they start to go in sympathy. The
animate
> > perversity of inanimate objects, one of the more obscure Murphy
Laws<g>!
> >
> > But as you are discovering; the short trips with frequent charging,
EVen
> > if it is only 10 amps for an hour here an' there, will almost double
your
> > range!If EV's EVer become common enough, and 240 volt 50 amp outlets are
put
> > out for us, and ya have one of Rich's chargers, you could go on
forever!EV
> > touring EVen!
> >
> > Seeya at Battery Beach Burnout!
> >
> > Bob
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tom Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 6:00 PM
> > Subject: Electric Isuzu
> >
> >
> > > I have been just looking at my records over the past year and reading
> > others post. Since I put my Electric Isuzu on the road 3rd March 2006 I
> > have driven it almost every day over 20 miles per day and on the weekend
I
> > will drive it over 100 miles at times. Of course not all in one trip.
But
> > if you charge when you get home from the store and then go again and
plug in
> > again you would be surprized at how many miles you can go in one day.
So
> > any how I have driven a total of 6000 mile the first year and that was
not a
> > full 12 months.
> > >
> > > I have not had any trouble except one day I forgot to plug the
inverter in
> > and the contactor kept dropping out on me. The 12v battery was going
dead.
> > After I pluged it back in and used my ball point pen to get it started
> > everything was ok.
> > >
> > > I guess the question I have is when I read about alot of the posts
they
> > say that after 2 years of driving they now have 6,000 miles on their
vehicle
> > or so. If I am putting on 6 or more thousand miles per year how long
will
> > my batteries last?
> > >
> > > I am using a Zivan charger and a 120 volt pack of Interstate us2200
> > batteries. I have to water them every 50 days or so and it is nice to
just
> > come home and plug in the batteries and not worry about what is
happening.
> > This has been about the best thing I have ever done.
> > >
> > > It was not that hard to convert and I don't do alot of fussing with
it.
> > It was just about plug and play.
> > >
> > > Tom Carpenter
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date:
12/31/06
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date: 12/31/06
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm sure you all have seen and handled one of those 1 Farad caps at
Best Buy or some other such store. Here is one(looks like two..) that
is 24V, 3 Farads:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7194662&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat28900050010&id=1112808825201
Now that big one they are supposed to be building down in Texas(3500V,
30 Farads), is there anyway we could build something like that in the
mean time by stringing together a bunch of these big(small?) caps?
How much range could be had?
How much range is that 3500V one going to offer?
Can someone use MSPaint and draw a line representing your estimated
discharge rate of it? Will it look something like this: \ ? AKA:
Not a linear discharge?
Are big, ultra, super capacitors of various names the future of EV's?
Do these types of devices hold any potential in being the primary
power source in an EV?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think I even read they're good for > 10000 full discharge cycles? But I
can't remember where I read that. Anyone else see it?
Brandon
On 1/1/07, Nick Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 11:24:43PM +0200, Kaido Kert wrote:
> A commenter on the Energy Blog set the record straight on the cost of
> the batteries:
> http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/12/altairnano_comp.html
> quote:
> NO, the battery packs do NOT cost $75,000
> apiece. They cost approximately $14,000 each.
Is this $14,000 for a 35 kWh pack with BMS that lasts > 10000 cycles?
This seems like a great deal!
Where do I sign?
Thanks!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> > Danny
> ***Again the EU2000i is just for an emergency.The truck should have a 35
mile
> range more than I need around this town.The cage was constructed in
primarly
> a header shop so the exaust issue has already been adressed.Thanks Dennis
>
I am not sure anyone would care..
Just as long as you had the genny was turned off for the run.
And... Hybrids are OEMs.. and can run as a what ever NHRA calls them.
What Dennis is building is not OEM, so it would have to fit into the
NEDRA or NHRA rules in some other way.
If you leave the generator in place, the vehicle doesn't fit into any
category but "exhibition." It then can't race against anyone, and it
is up to the whim of the track tech inspector whether it can run at all.
The NHRA requires that the fuel system be completely removed for
competition as an EV. "Electric motors only permitted." is also in
the NHRA EV rules. If it isn't an EV, (or an OEM hybrid) then it
can't have an added electric drive motor. You also can't relocate the
gasoline motor from where it was originally. You also have to run a
"car" engine of some sort. Otherwise, you move into the limbo of
"exhibition class."
It would be a good time for NEDRA to figure this out...Just what class we
racers and PHEV hackers could run our street rigs in.
There are some pretty fast Lexus hybrids out there.
Unless they (NEDRA) alter the rules drastically, you can't
have a fuel system on the vehicle. As the rules stand, it has to be
100% electric to qualify for a record. Perhaps they will change this,
but it won't be a simple task.
Also, since NEDRA follows the safety rules for NHRA, (and
runs on NHRA tracks,) anything that expressly can't run under NHRA
rules, can't run under NEDRA rules. (Bucking the NHRA safety rules
would put NEDRA in a nearly indefensible position, if an accident
were to occur.)
I'm not at all sure what modifications to an OEM hybrid the
NHRA allows. Of course, the vehicle under discussion in not an OEM hybrid.
I can see Madman making a series hybrid that has a 8 or 9 incher hanging
below.. doing Shove support to the ICE and stock hybrid equipment.
Aside from "exhibition", I don't know where you would race
it, at least with the present NHRA and NEDRA rules.
This "safety rule" stuff is trickier than most people realize. :^)
Bill Dube'
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well an EU2000i should be fully removable.
Really I don't have a prejudice against a genny as a non-EV heresy. The
thing is so many people have come on here with motivations of being an
example of how to be "green" and/or use less gas and think a genny will
be a good way to do that. The numbers show the genny power is much
worse per kwh than a modern car and would be very difficult to compete
against the original factory-installed engine for mpg.
It might be a solution for emergencies, or some people say it would
allow an EV to meet the last few percent of their driving needs and if
it couldn't do that last few percent they'd forget about EVs. All I can
say is it's quite difficult to justify on an emissions or mpg
standpoint, though not impossible.
So the negative response is mainly because so many people have
unrealistic expectations about what problems it will be able to solve.
I can see where your expectations don't seem to involve anything too
unrealistic so that's good.
The other thing is that when people talk about putting a genny on an EV,
the idea spreads and spreads a lot ignorance of the problems with it;
people start raving about it like it like it's a magic bullet to solve
the fuel problem, just a step above the guys who want to put a generator
on the the rear axle and make the batteries charge themselves as the
motor runs. Well, all I can do is ask that you make it clear to people
who see the generator that powering a car by an ordinary electrical
generator is not in itself a step forward. In your case, the car body
is the primary step forward.
Danny
Rich Rudman wrote:
Danny
***Again the EU2000i is just for an emergency.The truck should have a 35
mile
range more than I need around this town.The cage was constructed in
primarly
a header shop so the exaust issue has already been adressed.Thanks Dennis
I am not sure anyone would care..
Just as long as you had the genny was turned off for the run.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Two 24v 3 Farad caps in series make a 48v, 1.5 Farad cap. 7 caps in
series have a total string capacitance reduced by a factor of 7. Sad
but that's physics.
So by my calcs you'd need 212,674 24V 3F caps to equal a 3500V, 30F
cap. I recall calculating the EEStor cap had a capacity equivalent to
about 4.5 gal of gas. Even if you had 1000 of those 24V 3F caps, that's
the energy of only 0.02 gal of gas which would only get you a few
thousand feet. Probably less than a mile anyways.
Danny
Ryan Stotts wrote:
I'm sure you all have seen and handled one of those 1 Farad caps at
Best Buy or some other such store. Here is one(looks like two..) that
is 24V, 3 Farads:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7194662&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat28900050010&id=1112808825201
Now that big one they are supposed to be building down in Texas(3500V,
30 Farads), is there anyway we could build something like that in the
mean time by stringing together a bunch of these big(small?) caps?
How much range could be had?
How much range is that 3500V one going to offer?
Can someone use MSPaint and draw a line representing your estimated
discharge rate of it? Will it look something like this: \ ? AKA:
Not a linear discharge?
Are big, ultra, super capacitors of various names the future of EV's?
Do these types of devices hold any potential in being the primary
power source in an EV?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
This one has been bugging me... if I had a pair of 8" motors capable of
series/parallel switching vs a single 11" motor with a 2 speed tranny, which
would be more efficient? Let's assume that the power output to the wheels
is the same. Or in other words, if you drag racers out there had the option
of going one way or the other (blank sheet here) which way would you go?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm posting this for posterity, so anyone else who runs into the same
problem I did may find this in the archive and won't waste time going
through the same frustration.
I bought a second-hand Curtis 1204-410 36/48V 225A controller to test my
motor installation on the Forkenswift, and I couldn't get it to work.
The controller came out of a Club Car golf cart and the seller assured
me it was in working order. Today I signed up at a golf cart forum to
see if I could find more info, and was just pointed to this wiring
diagram for the Club Car in question:
- http://www.studmonkeyracing.com/forums/cc48v.jpg
It shows that the controller does NOT use a standard potentiometer.
It's wired to a 5-wire unit labeled "multi-step potentiometer" which is
in turn connected to a trio of limit switches. 2 wires from this setup
ultimately find their way to the tabs on the Curtis where one would
otherwise connect a regular 0-5k pot.
Apparently I'm not the only person who wasn't able to get this specific
Curtis model to work in a lightweight conversion project with a standard
pot. I found it discussed (and not really resolved) on the EVDL back in
2001...
- http://www.crest.org/discussion/ev/200101/msg00015.html
- http://www.crest.org/discussion/ev/current/msg00066.html
And at visforvoltage (also not resolved) (Google cache link)...
- http://tinyurl.com/yd3gsn
Figuring out from the Club Car's circuit diagram whether I could jury
rig the right kind of input to make it work is beyond my abilities.
I'll probably just try to re-sell the Curtis (to a Club Car owner) and
keep watching for something more "open source".
Darin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you do the math, you discover that the transmission doesn't really
help you on the drag strip.
At first thought, you might think it would help, but the added
spinning mass eats up any advantage. You are better off going to
higher voltage, a more powerful controller, or, very likely,
series-parallel on the motors.
On the drag strip, anything that spins, you must accelerate twice.
You have to accelerate it linearly down the track with the driver and
everything else. Additionally, you have to rotationally accelerate
it. The faster it is spinning at the end of the track, the more it
weighs, and the bigger the diameter, the worse it is slowing you down.
As a rule of thumb, you are willing to add three pounds of
non-spinning mass to eliminate one pound of spinning mass.
Since a series-parallel system add no spinning parts, it is very
likely to win out over a transmission. It also weighs less than a
transmission.
I think we are going to try out a series-parallel system on our next
race. We shall see if it helps. In theory, it should make the bike go faster.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But in
practice.....
Bill Dube'
At 11:46 PM 1/1/2007, you wrote:
Hi all,
This one has been bugging me... if I had a pair of 8" motors capable of
series/parallel switching vs a single 11" motor with a 2 speed tranny, which
would be more efficient? Let's assume that the power output to the wheels
is the same. Or in other words, if you drag racers out there had the option
of going one way or the other (blank sheet here) which way would you go?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>>>>Jerry doesn't bother with calculations, or measurements.
>>>
>>> That would be a good line if it were true which by
>>> now you know is not as my calc's were already posted
>>> first, at least in my e mail. ;^D Maybe next time you
>>> could give me a little time to respond than an hr or 2?
>>
>>Sorry Jerry, I was just trying to help you out. WHat I
>>said has been your standard response to me when ever I
>>questioned your postings.
>
>
> That's just not true Peter and you should know it.
> It's also amazing you answered this post. I'd have at least
> apologized offline had I blown it like you did!
Jerry, this is an open forum and EVERYTHING you write here ends up
archived. A simple search of the archives comes up with dozens of
instances when you reply that your experience building (boats, EVs, etc.)
allows you to come up with figures without needing to resort to
measurements.
For example on 28 Jun 2004 you wrote in response to me:
>> Without measuring the drag it's just pure speculation and aerodynamic
>> design by speculation is notoriously ineffective.
>
> Maybe you and others can't but that doesn't mean I can't!!!
> Of course designing, building over 300 wind, water powered projects help.
>>
>>Like for example, how it is you use the weight of the
>>batteries in your Freedom EV to lower the center of gravity
>>of the whole vehicle below the center of gravity of the
>>batteries. That doesn't make sense to me.
>
> Not to me either as I don't say that!! Where did you
> get that idea? I want to see your reference? I said, say my
> CG is about 13-14" high and stand by that.
> I've never said my CG was lower than the battery's
> CG. Yes, it is very low as designed which makes 3wheeler
You dont say that directly, but your previous figures did.
Youve always claimed that location of the batteries allows the Freedom EV
to have a super low CoG. This makes sense, its just your specific claims
on the exact CoG point that didnt add up.
You used to claim that the Freedom EV had a ground clearance of 6-7
(Actually variable between 4 and 10 but normally at 6-7) and a CoG of
12. If youre memory is getting fuzzy on this, check the archives for 1
Aug 2005, specifically your response to Don Cameron.
When I asked you how you came up with 12 CoG since the batteries CoG
would be at or above this point, you responded On 2 Aug 2005::
>Hi Peter and All,
> I just don't have enough time to argue with
> you over small details that may change. You refuse to
> except my facts so no use arguing with you.
And further that:
> My experience tells me I'm right or a least close to it.
(hmm, there is that, My experience thing again)
FWIW I measured the CoG of an old Trojan CG battery, it was slightly above
5". Of course this is an old battery, so Im sure quite a bit of active
material (i.,e. Lead) has sunk to the bottom and shifted the CoG lower
than normal, so its quite possible that a new battery has an even higher
CoG.
> So please tell me where is all the higher weight you
> think makes CG on the Freedom EV that raises it's CG?
> Everything but some fairly light but strong body,
> 20-.50lbs/sq', ect,
What about the windows? Your windshield starts at what? 26-27" above the
ground? Higher? Glass is pretty heavy.
Then there is the wiper motor (you do have wipers?) steering wheel,
dashboard?, seats, etc.
> is down around 6" above the floor,
> batteries, motor
, wheels, suspension, ect, all have CG's
> below that. No?
Well, let's see, what's the diameter of the wheel you are using? 24"?
26"? That means their CoG is 12-13"
Unless your doing something unusual the shocks and upper suspension mounts
are above the center of the wheels. I don't know your exact design, do
you have enough mass below the middle of the wheel to offset this weight
above?
> How high is a GC battery's CG? It's about 4.25" high!!
> Now add 6" of road clearance, 3/4" chassis thickness
> and the batteries CG is about 11"! No? Now batts are more
> than 55% of it's weight with most other weights about the
> same except the body which only weighs about 100lbs above
> the CG.
Lets say you're right and the batteries CoG is at 11, this means your
previous claims of 12 are wrong, or do you deny that still? No, you
can't be denying that because you've moved the CoG up 2 inches.
Your current claims are doubtful also. What would you estimate the CoG
of the body, not counting the electronics (batts, motor, etc) is? 28
perhaps? Remember the window glass, etc.
Ok, lets call it 26
Thats 12 above the upper end of your new CoG claims.
Lets see batts are at 11, motor, controller, etc. at 12.75 inches (your
figures from above), shall we say 12 for the heavy stuff?
So for every pound centered around 22 (14 above claimed CoG) you need 6
lbs of batteries, motor, etc. located 2 below the CoG.
FWIW 14 is probably getting close. 12 is unbelievable even though you
previously insisted that your years of experience told you that you were
right.
> While I've never described it in this detail, I'd
> thought anyone would know that, especially you as you build
> 3wheelers. I guess some just don't.
> Maybe you should do some math before attacking
> someone with such bull.
Well, Jerry
when I asked you about your math before, because it didnt add
up, you fell back on your standard My experience line.
>
>>
>>When I've asked how you measured or calculated your posted
>>extreemly low CoG and Cd for the Freedown EV, you've always
>>stated that you don't need to measure these items and can
>>state them with certainty based on your "Vast Amount of
>>Experience"
>
> Again not true. I do weight studies as I always say
> when asked,
You did NOT say this when I asked you about this in 2005.
I'll admit, after you blew me off like that I figured it wasn't worth
asking you questions any more, so I haven't paid much attention to
anything you've said since then.
> where each part is weighed and located to
> measure it's CG both up and down and for and aft. In
> 3wheelers it's very important for a safe vehicle as you know
> Peter. I've been doing CG's for over 35 yrs and just not
> that hard. You seem to have selective or imaginative memory?
Im sorry, who has a selective memory? Check the archives Jerry.
>
>>
>>FWIW I don't doubt your skills as a fabricator, the Freedom
>>EV looks great.
>
> Thank you, it's one of my best works.
Your welcome. Just so you know, Im not debating your skills or
experience, just your claims. Especially the ones that dont add up and
your instance that the only thing you need to back up your claims is your
experience.
>
>>
>>I just wish yo'd either stop making questionable claims
>>about it, or back them up with something other that your
>>"Vast Amount of Experience". Maybe some actual facts and
>>measured figures.
>
> What claims? I want details which claims I've made
> that can't be backed up with facts Peter?
See above quoted messages.
> Why didn't you answer the facts on my mileage post I
> put up before you said I don't post calc's instead of trying
> to bull your way out of being just plain wrong in this post?
What was the Cd you used again to calculate your mileage? Where/how did
you measure/calculate it?
Are your still claiming that the Freedom EV with its sharp edges and flat
plat windshield has a Cd of .23 (lower that even the super slippery
Insight), or have you changed this too? At any rate, have you calculated
or measured this now, or are you going to fall back on your my years of
experience bit again?
I really liked your quote above where you claim to be able to do accurate
aerodynamic analysis just be guessing.
>>> As you know I'm not great at higher math but that
>>> doesn't mean I can't figure out things. I, like the
>>> boatbuilders, other craftsmen of old, design by rules of
>>> thumb, %, and known working examples, ratio's.
>>
>>I have no problem with rules of thumb, or even crafting
>>items using nothing but the old mark 1 eyeball. I have
>>great admiration for these types of craftsmen.
>>
>>My only issue is with posting concrete numbers and then
>>refusing to back them up with measurements or even decent
>>calculations.
>
> Again show me an example? At least when I'm wrong I'm
> man enough to admit it.
Again check the archives for early Aug 2005 when you refused to answer my
questions about your claimed specs for the Freedom EV.
Ill save you some time, here is my questions and your response from the
Archives:
On 02 Aug 2005 Jerry Dycus wrote:
Hi Peter and All,
I just don't have enough time to argue with
you over small details that may change. You refuse to
except my facts so no use arguing with you.
Lets just build it, test it to see just what
it does. The track will prove what is and isn't. My
experience tells me I'm right or a least close to it.
If I can get even close it will be a breakthrough.
Am I optimistic, sure!! But I usually make
my goals when I try things like this doing things the
Experts say can't be done.
Please feel free to bring whatever you want
to autocross race against it when you return.
I have an EV to build now.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
--- Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jerry, as I understand it the specs for the Freedom
> Ev are as follows:
>
> Frontal area: 18 sqf
> Height: 48"
> Width: 54" ave, 60" max
> Ground clearance: 4-10" variable
> Cd: .23
> COG: 12"
> Wheel diameter: 23", rim 14"
> Weight racing: 1000 lbs
> Weight normal: 1400 lbs
> Batteries Racing: 6ea Orbitals
> Batteries normal: 12ea T105s
>
> I'm assuming from some of your other comments that
> the 48" height is
> measured from the top of the vehicle to the bottom
> and not to the ground.
> Is this correct?
>
> Could you explain exactly how you came up with some
> of these figures please?
> Specifically how did you calculate this
> astonishingly low Cd? That's even
> lower than the Insight (.25) Just by looking at the
> Freedom EV it appears
> that it would have a higher Cd than the Insight, but
> it's not possible to
> calculate, or even accurately estimate, Cd just by
> looking at something.
> They've got some modeling software that comes pretty
> close to actual wind
> tunnel tests, but every one I've tried has been to
> complicated for me.
> What software did you use?
>
> I also can't understand how you arrived at 12" for
> your COG.
> You state that normally the vehicle will have 6=7"
> of ground clearance.
> That means that virtually all of your weight (except
> the wheels) is at
> least 6" off the ground.
> The COG for a T105 is approx 6" up from the bottom.
> Assuming you don't
> use any insulation on the bottom of the battery box,
> this means that the
> COG for the batteries is going to be at least 12-13"
> up.
> The COG of the vehicles body is going to be at least
> 24".
> The COG of the driver (a significant portion of this
> vehicles weight) will
> be approx 24" up.
> Since the batteries are already at or above 12",
> where are you getting the
> ballast to counteract all of the other heavy items
> that are far above your
> claimed COG?
>
> Perhaps you meant during racing when you lower the
> ground clearance to 4"?
> I'm assuming you are getting part of this from
> using lower profile tires,
> because if you use 23" diameter dires on 14" rims,
> the bottom of the rims
> are going to be 4.5" inches up, or higher than the
> bottom of the frame.
> You'll probably have a hard time finding a race
> director that will allow
> you to race a vehicle with such an unsafe
> configuration.
>
> So, assuming low profile tires and a 4" ground
> clearance...
>
> Your race configuration also includes a
> significantly reduced battery
> weight. Granted the Orbitals have a lower COG, that
> plus the 4" ground
> clearance will lower your battery COG to approx 8",
> but 6 Orbitals only
> weight 246lbs. The driver, seat & helmet are going
> to weigh almost this
> much and, even dropping 2", their COG is going to be
> at least 20".
> This means the combined COG of batteries and driver
> is at least 14".
> The rest of the vehicle's COG is still up around 22"
> (perhaps more).
> For racing you're almost certainly going to need at
> least a roll bar and
> preferably a roll cage, this might move your COG up
> a bit.
>
> I'm stumped, how did you come up with 12"?
>
>
> Elsewhere you mentioned
> " Also I have no polar moment, chassis twist so
> transistion in turns is much faster than a 4wh car
> by
> 1/2 as much."
>
> Do you know what "Polar Moment of Inertia" is? If
> so, can you explain the
> above statement? It doesn't make sense to me.
>
> Also chasis twist, which is pretty small in most
> race cars anyway, isn't
> the only thing that effects transistion time in
> turns. I'm pretty sure
> that suspension load/unloading also effects this, as
> does tire deflection,
> etc.
>
> I'm not saying that 3wh don't have an advantage in
> transistions, I just
> can figure out any reason why they would. Can you
> explain?
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Umm, drag racing isn't really about efficiency. If you give a drag racer
a choice between lots of torque, or high efficiency, they'll pick the
torque every time.
The 11" with the tranny will probably be more efficient. 11" motors are
usually slightly more efficient, and using a tranny allows it to run more
efficiently at lower RPMs.
> Hi all,
>
> This one has been bugging me... if I had a pair of 8" motors capable of
> series/parallel switching vs a single 11" motor with a 2 speed tranny,
> which
> would be more efficient? Let's assume that the power output to the wheels
> is the same. Or in other words, if you drag racers out there had the
> option
> of going one way or the other (blank sheet here) which way would you go?
>
>
--
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 ---
On 1/2/07, Brandon Kruger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think I even read they're good for > 10000 full discharge cycles? But I
can't remember where I read that. Anyone else see it?
Brandon
20 000
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/12/altair_nanotech.html#more
quote:
The NanoSafe batteries charge in less than 10 minutes, have a power
density of 4 kW/kg, have 85% charge retention at 20,000 cycles, will
not explode and have no thermal runaway, according to the company.
/quote
This, of course, is according to the company. From what i understand
only the company itself and Phoenix Motorcars are now in possession of
these batteries, no independent entity has them and is able to verify
their claims so far.
-kert
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 12:48:22AM -0500, Darin - MetroMPG.com wrote:
>
> - http://www.studmonkeyracing.com/forums/cc48v.jpg
>
> It shows that the controller does NOT use a standard potentiometer.
> It's wired to a 5-wire unit labeled "multi-step potentiometer" which is
> in turn connected to a trio of limit switches. 2 wires from this setup
> ultimately find their way to the tabs on the Curtis where one would
> otherwise connect a regular 0-5k pot.
>
I now little about curtis controllers, but from what I see on the diagram,
the limit switches are just to switch in or out resistors in parallel
to the throttle pot to limit speed in reverse.
It should work without them...
--
Eduardo K. |
http://www.carfun.cl | I'm white and nerdy
http://e.nn.cl | Weird Al
|
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What if you left the generator in place which disconnected from the EV just
before the run. I seen this done back either in the 60's or 70's. This
method kept the on board batteries super charge to the last second.
This same guy also ran two buss bars which lay down on the track with one on
both sides of the EV. There was some time of spring loaded out riggers that
made contact with the buss bar. A very large 125 kw 240/480 volt generator
energized these rails.
Of course this was only a demo only.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 10:51 PM
Subject: Homemade Hybrids and NEDRA, NHRA (was: Current Eliminator news)
>
> >
> > > > Danny
> > > ***Again the EU2000i is just for an emergency.The truck should have a
> > > 35
> >mile
> > > range more than I need around this town.The cage was constructed in
> >primarly
> > > a header shop so the exaust issue has already been adressed.Thanks
> > > Dennis
> > >
> >
> >I am not sure anyone would care..
> >
> >Just as long as you had the genny was turned off for the run.
> >
> >
> >And... Hybrids are OEMs.. and can run as a what ever NHRA calls them.
>
> What Dennis is building is not OEM, so it would have to fit into the
> NEDRA or NHRA rules in some other way.
>
> If you leave the generator in place, the vehicle doesn't fit into any
> category but "exhibition." It then can't race against anyone, and it
> is up to the whim of the track tech inspector whether it can run at all.
>
> The NHRA requires that the fuel system be completely removed for
> competition as an EV. "Electric motors only permitted." is also in
> the NHRA EV rules. If it isn't an EV, (or an OEM hybrid) then it
> can't have an added electric drive motor. You also can't relocate the
> gasoline motor from where it was originally. You also have to run a
> "car" engine of some sort. Otherwise, you move into the limbo of
> "exhibition class."
>
>
> >It would be a good time for NEDRA to figure this out...Just what class we
> >racers and PHEV hackers could run our street rigs in.
> >
> >There are some pretty fast Lexus hybrids out there.
>
> Unless they (NEDRA) alter the rules drastically, you can't
> have a fuel system on the vehicle. As the rules stand, it has to be
> 100% electric to qualify for a record. Perhaps they will change this,
> but it won't be a simple task.
>
> Also, since NEDRA follows the safety rules for NHRA, (and
> runs on NHRA tracks,) anything that expressly can't run under NHRA
> rules, can't run under NEDRA rules. (Bucking the NHRA safety rules
> would put NEDRA in a nearly indefensible position, if an accident
> were to occur.)
>
> I'm not at all sure what modifications to an OEM hybrid the
> NHRA allows. Of course, the vehicle under discussion in not an OEM hybrid.
>
>
> >I can see Madman making a series hybrid that has a 8 or 9 incher hanging
> >below.. doing Shove support to the ICE and stock hybrid equipment.
>
> Aside from "exhibition", I don't know where you would race
> it, at least with the present NHRA and NEDRA rules.
>
> This "safety rule" stuff is trickier than most people realize.
> :^)
>
> Bill Dube'
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A solution I've been trying to keep mice out of my EV is to use a small
portable radio tuned to a nasty rock station at a high enough volume that
they don't appreciate it! Seems to be working thus far - some animals are
smarter than some people!
Joseph H. Strubhar
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.gremcoinc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 4:08 PM
Subject: Rats attacking EV wiring (was Hairball control wire sizing
> On 31 Dec 2006 at 17:38, Rush wrote:
>
> > This is way off subject ...
>
> Actually this may not be as far off subject as you might think. A fair
> number of EVers store their EVs for the winter, and this can be a concern
> unless they have a very secure storage facility.
>
> In responding, please focus on practical ways to prevent this rather than
on
> the more esoteric question of why the rats attack EV wiring.
>
> My suggestion is a traditional one, but I find it very effective. Keeping
> cats in and around an outbuilding such as a garage mitigates the rat
> problem. An adult rat isn't afraid of a cat, but a female rat will move
> elsewhere to give birth since a cat IS a danger to a young rat. This
tends
> to gradually reduce the population as long as there's not much (real) food
> on your premises.
>
> I suggest though that you keep the cat(s) out of the EV itself, as cats
can
> pose their own cleaning problems.
>
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EV List Assistant Administrator
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
> or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
> To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
> the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date: 12/31/2006
12:47 PM
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If your looking to go that high-end, you would be better off going with an
AC system. You can find them either with Ac Propulsion or Metric Mind.
http://www.metricmind.com/index1.htm
http://www.acpropulsion.com/technology/gen2.htm
Brandon
On 1/2/07, Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sure; 858 hp from the current model is really impressive, I agree.
What I wonder though is: would a 1200V model potentially appeal to
NASCAR, F1, etc. types? Could a model with this much power potential
spur additional interest and innovation?
As it is, the item in question does not exist. If it did exist; would
great things happen as a direct result of it existing?
What could be done with a 1200V Zilla that currently cannot be done?
Is there an existing non EV market that is electric that could and
would utilize this motor controller if it was available?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Here is what is done around here -
- get some cats or dogs...
- Antifreeze in small containers on the engine block to poison the rats, but if
they die in the engine compartment then it tends to smell...
- There is a spray that a local 'rats r us' store sells that supposedly stops
the rats from eating wire if you spray it on, tired it and just didn't like
spraying something unknown.
- Hang a light in the compartment, rats don't like light. Got to be a drag to
turn it on and off daily.
- drive it daily to move it...
- just prop open the hood by about a foot or so, they don't like light and the
circulation of air makes it hot and cold, not condusive for a 'home'.
So after trying them all, the best and easiest for me is prop open the hood
(but I have to tie the hood down against the prop cause the wind would pick up
the hood and blow it back).
It also helps to clear all the nests within a 100 ft radius, and keep them
cleared out. They are very persistent animals.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
www.Airphibian.com
--- End Message ---
