EV Digest 6318
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: GVWR limitation for EV conversions, Comments
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Using a 500A shunt with a 1200A controller.
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: EEstor
by "Myles Twete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Using a 500A shunt with a 1200A controller.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: efficiency comparison - 2 speed gearbox or series/parallel
by "Peter Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Xantrex Link-10 with RS-232 Discontinued
by "Brian M. Sutin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Xantrex Link-10 with RS-232 Discontinued
by MARK DUTKO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: EV where to start
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: EEstor
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: Sunnyvale Caltrain Station EV Charging?
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) More info RE: Using a 500A shunt with a 1200A controller.
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: EEstor
by "Arthur W. Matteson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: Xantrex Link-10 with RS-232 Discontinued
by "Garret Maki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: EEstor
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) RE: EEstor
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: EEstor
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: EEstor
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: EEstor
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Jonathon Lemus wrote:
> A possible short-term solution would be to put a limited # of
> batteries under the truck bed so you can still make the weight
> restrictions, then make a 'removable' range boosting pack that
> you can slide in/out of the truck bed for longer trips.
I think you may have missed the subtle detail that while this might
allow one to sneak through the inspection, if the vehicle is ever
involved in an accident while operating with the range boosting pack
installed (i.e. over GVWR), the insurance is null and void (all on-road
vehicles in Canada are required to carry third-party liability as a bare
minimum). This is a pretty serious financial risk to take.
The only way I can see the range boosting pack approach working is if
the pack is on a trailer, and the range-extending trailer is within the
rated towing capacity of the original vehicle.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In my previous post, I described extra low voltage
sagging. At the time I attributed it to extra cold.
While that may have been true, I had also replaced the
controller which had failed, with a more powerful one.
As a result, I now had a mismatch between the shunt &
controller.
I am gathering that having the controller at full max
current caused extra deep current pulls (up to 1200A
from the batteries), hence the extra low sag.
Correct?
I either turn down the current max on the controller
to prevent this sag, or I keep a lighter foot on the
throttle AND purchase a new shunt. Also correct?
Appreciatively,
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?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know.
Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> EEstor has been very tight lipped and getting info is like pulling hens
> teeth. I tried several times and hit blank walls. That they have finally
> done a PR with stats is interesting as they APPEAR to have done their
> homework and they do realize how big the potential volume is.
>
> The DC to DC converter will be interesting as it will need a very
> wide input voltage range to get the 100% discharge claimed.
Are you sure?
With 3500v of stacked caps, the easy way would be to use 12 - 300v Input
Vicor DC-DC converters, and parallel the outputs thru a current sharing
arrangement.
Easy, that is, if the isolated outputs of the Vicors can handle up to 3500v
isolation...which, may not be easy.
-Myles Twete, Portland, Or
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob Bath wrote:
> In my previous post, I described extra low voltage
> sagging. At the time I attributed it to extra cold.
Which is probably the correct and reasonable cause.
> I am gathering that having the controller at full max
> current caused extra deep current pulls (up to 1200A
> from the batteries), hence the extra low sag.
> Correct?
No, not very likely. The controller is unlikely to have been drawing
1200A from the batteries for very long at all, and if it ever did so for
long enough that you would see the voltage sag, you would also have seen
your 500A ammeter pegged. Not to mention, you should have had a pretty
good indication of the 1200A draw just from the seat of your pants. ;^>
> I either turn down the current max on the controller
> to prevent this sag, or I keep a lighter foot on the
> throttle AND purchase a new shunt. Also correct?
You don't need a new shunt since the shunt required is dictated by the
requirements of the meter to which the shunt is connected, and that
hasn't changed with the controller swap. Generally, shunts will exhibit
some permanent shift in value if operated in excess of their rated
current for long enough to heat significantly, however, even if it
occurs, the shift is unlikely to be of significance outside of a
laboratory setting.
The only reason for installing a new shunt would be if you are also
installing a new ammeter so that you can measure/observe currents up to
or exceeding the 1200A limit of your controller.
I think you are being confused by having installed a more powerful
controller at the same time as the battery temp has dropped
(significantly), and will find that the major factor at play here is
simply (much) greater battery sag at low temperatures.
You mentioned having the current limit on the controller turned down
about halfway already, and on a DCP, this is the battery current limit,
so I wouldn't expect you to have subjected the pack to 1200A draws,
though you may well still be subjecting it to greater peak current (or
for longer) than the 600A controller could.
If you want to know for sure, turn the current limit down further until
you can't peg your 500A ammeter even when the WOT LED lights, if the
battery sag is still similarly excessive, then you know it is the
temperature.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
what about charging time of 30 minutes only ? how is that done ?
With a 6kW charger?
--
www.electric-lemon.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't know if this is old news, but Xantrex just discontinued the
Link-10 with RS-232 model. The good news is that I just called
Xantrex and spoke with an engineer who said that the insides of the
Link-10's are all the same, so all you have to do if you want an
RS-232 port is solder on your own DB-9 connector. Same with the
alarm signal.
Good news for those of us who planned to spend $90+ more dollars
for an RS-232 port, only to discover that no one had them in stock.
Brian
Alfa Romeo Electric Conversion
http://www.skewray.com/alfa
--
Brian M. Sutin, Ph.D. Space System Engineering and Optical Design
Skewray Research/316 W Green St/Claremont CA 91711 USA/(909) 621-3122
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
may be but it only reads to 500A- the "choice" model reads up to 1kA
m
On Jan 18, 2007, at 5:46 PM, Brian M. Sutin wrote:
I don't know if this is old news, but Xantrex just discontinued the
Link-10 with RS-232 model. The good news is that I just called
Xantrex and spoke with an engineer who said that the insides of the
Link-10's are all the same, so all you have to do if you want an
RS-232 port is solder on your own DB-9 connector. Same with the
alarm signal.
Good news for those of us who planned to spend $90+ more dollars
for an RS-232 port, only to discover that no one had them in stock.
Brian
Alfa Romeo Electric Conversion
http://www.skewray.com/alfa
--
Brian M. Sutin, Ph.D. Space System Engineering and Optical Design
Skewray Research/316 W Green St/Claremont CA 91711 USA/(909) 621-3122
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rachael and All,
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Rachael Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV where to start
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:47:18 -0800 (PST)
>There are many EV clubs around the US and Ev'ers
>everywhere. But this list is the most reliable info on EV's
>you can trust. Much mis-info on EV's around so best check
>things out here before you spend money.
>
> To help you better we need more info.
>
> What will you actually use it for on a daily basis?
>
> How far is your commute?
>
> Can you charge at work? If you can saves much, much
>costs!!
>
> Where will you drive for terrain type, temp and
>EVer's in your area?
>
>>Thanks for the advice,
>>Rachael
>
> Your welcome and why we are here to give you a
>reliable EV grin ;^D.
> Jerry Dycus
>
>
> Dear Jerry,
> yours is by far the most hopeful of all the replies. I
>checked the exact mileage of my daily commute and one way
>it is 66 miles, round up to 70. I still have to find out
>if I can charge there, but the good news is I have at least
>9 hours usually before the return trip.
On conversions that's going to be hard as you would
need 100 mile range to do that with reasonable battery life.
You'll need a good, built as an EV which is very rare,
costly. You could build your own for a fairly low cost like
they build experimental aircraft.
There are several good groups for 3wh cabin EV's that
would fit your needs like vortex3wheeler list and 2f1rEV
list for building your own. I'm building a 2front wheel 3wh
EV Sportwagon now that would do what you want. Doing it
yourself, could be done under $5k, 500-1000 hrs. They get
great range cheaply by reducing weight, air drag at a
reasonable price. While it takes time, it's not that hard if
you are handy.
For you from what you've said, I think a 2 seat Honda
Insight Hybrid which can get 60-90 mpg in that style of
driving will be your best bet. Maybe someone has a plug in
conversion for them by now? There is an Insight list you
could join to see if you like it. Gas prices are falling
another $.30/gal or so from now for a short while, 6 months
or so, so their price may drop some, being a good time to
buy one. They should go under $10k.
It has a hand built alum no rust frame/body and low
production numbers, but enough so parts are available that
in 10 or so yrs, will be a rare classic, worth a nice piece
of change as the first hybrid in the US in modern times. So
you get great gas mileage for 10 yrs and probably sell it
for more than you paid for it ;^D. My kind of deal!!
Or when the price of Li-ion batteries comes way down
as it should in about 3 yrs, it will be about prefect for a
200 mile range EV if you want to go that way then, having
worn out the motor.
The trip itself is
>in the central valley of Cal. and is very flat, I don't
>know any other EV'ers in my area, but I do know a couple of
>folks who are interested in it, as I am.
Yahoo EV Clubs links and you should find several
within a couple hunderd miles and Evers around you as Cal is
a hotbed of Ev's. Search the EVPhoto Album for Cal,
Califoria for EV'ers near you if it does that.
Temps in the
>winter don't USUALLY get below 30 but we've had unusually
>cold winter, and temps in the summer can exceed 110. But
>we average around between 50 winter and 90 summer. I was
>begining to feel a little discouraged as the largest part
>of my gas usage is in my daily commute and it's the part I
>most wanted to elimanate. I'm trying to learn as much as
>possible. :D
That's how to do it. This list, if you can handle the
volume, is a Uni level, maybe better, course on EV's!!
> Thanks for the help.
> Rachael
> ps one more silly question, does anyone know if there is
>a portable solar panel that could be used to charge the
>car up if you can't access a charge any other way, esp
>since it sits for 9 hours in the sun each day?
Not enough power to be worth it as it would takes
many days, maybe weeks to get a full charge from close to
empty. But making it aero and light lets a smaller batery,
drive to get good range at speeds.
One last possibility is building a 2wh aero cabin MC
EV, though you would be one of the first to do so, it has
been done. I'm planning on doing one after my present one is
going well.
A few things for you to think about,
Jerry Dycus
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry,
switching converters inputs cannot be placed in series
arrangement, unless you find a way to use input voltage
feedback, as normally a converter has a negative resistance:
The current goes up as the voltage goes down.
This makes for an instable system.
You NEED 3500V rated input converter - another reason is the
power that you want to convert and the bi-directional conversion
(charging and motor control, if you want to use available motor controllers)
but at least using fast charging, you may want to be able to pull
large currents at 240V, somewhere around the 10kW and above.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Myles Twete
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 5:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: EEstor
> EEstor has been very tight lipped and getting info is like pulling hens
> teeth. I tried several times and hit blank walls. That they have finally
> done a PR with stats is interesting as they APPEAR to have done their
> homework and they do realize how big the potential volume is.
>
> The DC to DC converter will be interesting as it will need a very
> wide input voltage range to get the 100% discharge claimed.
Are you sure?
With 3500v of stacked caps, the easy way would be to use 12 - 300v Input
Vicor DC-DC converters, and parallel the outputs thru a current sharing
arrangement.
Easy, that is, if the isolated outputs of the Vicors can handle up to 3500v
isolation...which, may not be easy.
-Myles Twete, Portland, Or
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jennifer,
Nema 5-15 outlets (the normal 3-pronged wall sockets) are often
available in many places, but not listed on EV Charger websites
because it takes too long to charge a car and parking is
usually not reserved at normal outlet locations, as they are
often placed for cleaning/vending purposes, not charging.
Can you make it both ways on a charge or is the distance too
far for your tired moped batteries?
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Grigg. John
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 4:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Sunnyvale Caltrain Station EV Charging?
Doesn't look like any standard three-prong household outlets are
there...
http://www.evchargernews.com/regions/94086_3.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rodriguez, Jennifer
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 3:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Sunnyvale Caltrain Station EV Charging?
Does anyone know if I can charge my electric moped (EVT 4000e) in the
parking garage there? It uses a standard three-prong household outlet.
I have to go to SF every day for a week and thought it would be nice to
ride my moped to the station instead of driving.
Thanks, Jenn
____________________________________________________________________________
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO EMAIL DISCLAIMER:
This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential,
and
privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review,
copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by other
than the County of Sacramento or the intended recipient is strictly
prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately
and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any
attachments thereto.
____________________________________________________________________________
_
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roger, your post was immensely helpful. Thanks.
I forgot to mention that this is with an _E-meter_.
That is my only instrumentation, and as such, I am
most often following volts, not current draws.
I also neglected to mention that first gear draws seem
to cause low voltage readings more often than when I
do _hills_, and also than when I'm in _second_ gear
(which is where I drive most often, of course).
> No, not very likely. The controller is unlikely to
> have been drawing
> 1200A from the batteries for very long at all, and
> if it ever did so for
> long enough that you would see the voltage sag, you
> would also have seen
> your 500A ammeter pegged.
But the E-meter is only getting an average sample.
> The only reason for installing a new shunt would be
> if you are also
> installing a new ammeter
nope.
> You mentioned having the current limit on the
> controller turned down
> about halfway already, and on a DCP, this is the
> battery current limit,
> so I wouldn't expect you to have subjected the pack
> to 1200A draws,
Just recently did that.
> If you want to know for sure, turn the current limit
> down further until
> you can't peg your 500A ammeter even when the WOT
> LED lights, if the
> battery sag is still similarly excessive, then you
> know it is the
> temperature.
>
Makes sense!
Again, thanks.
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?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 19:32 -0800, Cor van de Water wrote:
> Sorry,
>
> switching converters inputs cannot be placed in series
> arrangement, unless you find a way to use input voltage
> feedback, as normally a converter has a negative resistance:
> The current goes up as the voltage goes down.
> This makes for an instable system.
If a purpose-built converter set had a fixed transformer ratio, had
bidirectional capability (needed for regen anyway), and had all their
outputs paralleled, they should be able to be paralleled without any
feedback whatsoever. This isn't necessarily the optimal configuration,
and "seriesing" off-the-shelf products isn't wise.
I don't think dealing with 3500V would be so difficult, despite being an
immense shock hazard. It seems that they must be able to make the
dielectric thinner (or such) to achieve the same result at 350V or so?
- Arthur
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The connector is there for the alarm signal and manual specifically says
that it is not a field upgradeable option to add the alarm. Is it just
there and working, or does a jumper need to be soldered in somewhere for
it to work?
Garret Maki
"so all you have to do if you want an
RS-232 port is solder on your own DB-9 connector. Same with the
alarm signal.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rod and others,
Funny that everyone is so concerned about 3,500 V being lethal
while nobody has a problem switching on their TV set with more
than 25,000 V on the picture tube or walking into the backyard,
under the 12,500 V power lines, while these can drop down any
second and probably do more often than cars explode into fireballs.
Mr Pham is not very knowledged in Electronics or he pretends that
he does not know how to convert the 3500V into useful motor
voltage and current. His suggestion to charge the EEstor to 500V
because most motor controllers can't handle any higher is like
saying that because record players were not able to handle more
than 78 RPM, no CD should ever be used at more than 1x speed.
I hope that a new motor controller will be developed for this
new storage medium....
Sure - a 3500V motor controller is different than a 300V motor
controller, but not much more than a 300V motor controller
differs from a 48V motor controller.
Just a matter of selecting the right parts and engineering it well.
Bomb-proof capacitor storage? Why?
If your controller blows in your EV, your batteries will not
cook away, would they? Why? One word: fuse.
I wrote before that since the EEstor consists of so many
parallel capacitors, their protection mechanism may be as simple
as a HV fuse for each unit. That, or a high voltage FET switch.
If you lose one module - too bad. Just keep driving.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Roderick Wilde
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:04 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EEstor
Greg, when I first hear of an exciting new product that sounds too good to
be true I first go to Google and read up on the product which many times is
just various articles based on press releases from the company. The second
thing I do is then go to Google and type in the name of the product again
and add the word scam behind it. Not that I think it is a scam, just so I
can read opposing viewpoints. If there are an incredible amount of opposing
viewpoints I start to wonder. I read many of these posts to help me form an
opinion. I suggest that others use this same process when trying to discern
the truth on new products. Here is just one post of many you may find of
interest. It was posted on The Green Car Congress web site on 1/17/07 by
Roger Pham.
Roderick Wilde
By Roger Pham
"Ceramic capacitors are not known for their high energy storage capacity.
Barium titanate has been used to make ceramic capacitors for quite
sometimes, and has nowhere near the energy capacity as claimed by EEStor
company.
The claimed 52kwh capacity of the EEstor device having 31 farads is due to
the 3,500 V maximum voltage rating. However, automotive power inverters and
power transformers are typically designed to handle battery voltages from
250-500 volts. Since Energy Stored = 1/2 Capacitance x Voltage Squared,
reducing the 3,500V down to a more reasonable 500V will reduce the storage
capacity of the EEstor from 52kwh down to 1kwh.
Otherwise, working with 3,500V in a personal vehicle is very lethal,
especially in the event of an accident. High-voltage capacitors can explode
violently upon aging of the dielectric material or other stresses that can
lower the dielectric property of the material. In a chain reaction, the
entire energy of this supercapacitor can be released as fast as a bomb
explosion. If you wanna build a thick, thick bomb-proof casing to contain
this 52kwh worth (~140lbs of TNT-equivalent) of energy that can be released
in a flash, you will need a lot of carbon fiber layers that will be very
heavy and costly. You might have better luck making a Compressed Hydrogen
tank out of carbon-fiber reinforcement. H2 by itself without O2 cannot
combust. Structural weakness in the carbon fiber tank may allow the H2 to
leak out at a fast rate, but it will not explode."
Good luck, EEStor. Y'all will need every bit of it!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:20 AM
Subject: EEstor
> http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=204515
>
> The first commercial application of the EESU is intended to be used in
> electric vehicles under a technology agreement with ZENN Motors Company.
> EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15
> kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor Company
> in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles. The production EESU for ZENN
> Motor Company will function to specification in operating environments as
> sever as negative 20 to plus 65 degrees Celsius, will weigh less than 100
> pounds, and will have ability to be recharged in a matter of minutes.
>
> Zap, Kapow Batman our offline energy storage problems are over,
> Greg
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date: 1/16/2007
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Especially a light car needs a very light and preferably small battery,
while still having a good range is required, so energy storage is a
big issue for a small car. (pardon the pun)
EEstor apparently did fit that bill and FGC is the first to take the
jump.
Actually I have been interested in shopping around for places that
can do this ceramics/metal deposit and material handling stuff,
to see if there is a way to make sure these modules will become
available for EVs, just in case EEstor is gobbled up by someone not
interested in EVs.
Once these capacitors (not batteries!) become available, the design
of the necessary electronics is just a matter of work.
Not trivial, but also not rocket science.
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Roderick Wilde
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:11 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EEstor
The really funny thing to me is that their target market and their exclusive
marketing agreement is for a 72 volt NEV by Feel Good Cars. Something in
this picture does not jive in my head. Please go read all the articles you
can find. The one I posted is one of many as I did say in my post. You may
want to also research the availability of 3500 volt EV motors or for a start
try finding 1000 volt ones. Concerning high voltage, you are correct that
higher voltage uses smaller gauge wire to achieve the same watts. That is
why Europe uses half the copper in their homes as the US does which most
likely amounts to a waste of resources in the amount of millions if not
billions of tons of copper. I wonder who thought up that brilliant idea.
Most likely a copper lobby.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: EEstor
>I have been curious about the safety of 52KW HV cap. Man, the explosive
>potential could be impressive. Or it may just burn, it's hard to say.
>
> The guy is whining about the high voltage. It's a big concern, that's for
> sure, but not insurmountable. What people aren't realizing is EVs really
> do become more practical at higher voltages and lower current levels. The
> cable needs extra-special insulation but doesn't need to be thick or have
> ultra-low resistance terminals. At 3500V vs 120V the wire only needs to
> carry 1/29th the current. 8ga is more than enough. Other things would of
> course need to change, the motor would be wound differently and brush
> motors may be impossible due to the arcing potential of high voltage.
>
> So they're actually putting out a cap, but 15KW instead of 52KW? Well
> that's the sort of degradation from the initial bold proposal I would
> expect and they might release a bigger version later (or you just put
> several together). It says "under 100lbs" which is less than half the
> weight of the proposed 52KW so the energy density isn't all that far off-
> they apparently just want to start small.
>
> Danny
>
> Roderick Wilde wrote:
>
>> Greg, when I first hear of an exciting new product that sounds too good
>> to be true I first go to Google and read up on the product which many
>> times is just various articles based on press releases from the company.
>> The second thing I do is then go to Google and type in the name of the
>> product again and add the word scam behind it. Not that I think it is a
>> scam, just so I can read opposing viewpoints. If there are an incredible
>> amount of opposing viewpoints I start to wonder. I read many of these
>> posts to help me form an opinion. I suggest that others use this same
>> process when trying to discern the truth on new products. Here is just
>> one post of many you may find of interest. It was posted on The Green Car
>> Congress web site on 1/17/07 by Roger Pham.
>>
>> Roderick Wilde
>>
>> By Roger Pham
>>
>> "Ceramic capacitors are not known for their high energy storage capacity.
>> Barium titanate has been used to make ceramic capacitors for quite
>> sometimes, and has nowhere near the energy capacity as claimed by EEStor
>> company.
>> The claimed 52kwh capacity of the EEstor device having 31 farads is due
>> to the 3,500 V maximum voltage rating. However, automotive power
>> inverters and power transformers are typically designed to handle battery
>> voltages from 250-500 volts. Since Energy Stored = 1/2 Capacitance x
>> Voltage Squared, reducing the 3,500V down to a more reasonable 500V will
>> reduce the storage capacity of the EEstor from 52kwh down to 1kwh.
>>
>> Otherwise, working with 3,500V in a personal vehicle is very lethal,
>> especially in the event of an accident. High-voltage capacitors can
>> explode violently upon aging of the dielectric material or other stresses
>> that can lower the dielectric property of the material. In a chain
>> reaction, the entire energy of this supercapacitor can be released as
>> fast as a bomb explosion. If you wanna build a thick, thick bomb-proof
>> casing to contain this 52kwh worth (~140lbs of TNT-equivalent) of energy
>> that can be released in a flash, you will need a lot of carbon fiber
>> layers that will be very heavy and costly. You might have better luck
>> making a Compressed Hydrogen tank out of carbon-fiber reinforcement. H2
>> by itself without O2 cannot combust. Structural weakness in the carbon
>> fiber tank may allow the H2 to leak out at a fast rate, but it will not
>> explode."
>>
>> Good luck, EEStor. Y'all will need every bit of it!
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Watson"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:20 AM
>> Subject: EEstor
>>
>>
>>> http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=204515
>>>
>>> The first commercial application of the EESU is intended to be used in
>>> electric vehicles under a technology agreement with ZENN Motors Company.
>>> EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15
>>> kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor
>>> Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles. The production EESU
>>> for ZENN Motor Company will function to specification in operating
>>> environments as sever as negative 20 to plus 65 degrees Celsius, will
>>> weigh less than 100 pounds, and will have ability to be recharged in a
>>> matter of minutes.
>>>
>>> Zap, Kapow Batman our offline energy storage problems are over,
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date:
>>> 1/16/2007
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It is just because it is not rocket science that we have so many choices of
controllers in the EV industry.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cor van de Water" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:20 PM
Subject: RE: EEstor
Especially a light car needs a very light and preferably small battery,
while still having a good range is required, so energy storage is a
big issue for a small car. (pardon the pun)
EEstor apparently did fit that bill and FGC is the first to take the
jump.
Actually I have been interested in shopping around for places that
can do this ceramics/metal deposit and material handling stuff,
to see if there is a way to make sure these modules will become
available for EVs, just in case EEstor is gobbled up by someone not
interested in EVs.
Once these capacitors (not batteries!) become available, the design
of the necessary electronics is just a matter of work.
Not trivial, but also not rocket science.
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Roderick Wilde
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:11 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EEstor
The really funny thing to me is that their target market and their
exclusive
marketing agreement is for a 72 volt NEV by Feel Good Cars. Something in
this picture does not jive in my head. Please go read all the articles you
can find. The one I posted is one of many as I did say in my post. You may
want to also research the availability of 3500 volt EV motors or for a
start
try finding 1000 volt ones. Concerning high voltage, you are correct that
higher voltage uses smaller gauge wire to achieve the same watts. That is
why Europe uses half the copper in their homes as the US does which most
likely amounts to a waste of resources in the amount of millions if not
billions of tons of copper. I wonder who thought up that brilliant idea.
Most likely a copper lobby.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: EEstor
I have been curious about the safety of 52KW HV cap. Man, the explosive
potential could be impressive. Or it may just burn, it's hard to say.
The guy is whining about the high voltage. It's a big concern, that's
for
sure, but not insurmountable. What people aren't realizing is EVs really
do become more practical at higher voltages and lower current levels.
The
cable needs extra-special insulation but doesn't need to be thick or have
ultra-low resistance terminals. At 3500V vs 120V the wire only needs to
carry 1/29th the current. 8ga is more than enough. Other things would
of
course need to change, the motor would be wound differently and brush
motors may be impossible due to the arcing potential of high voltage.
So they're actually putting out a cap, but 15KW instead of 52KW? Well
that's the sort of degradation from the initial bold proposal I would
expect and they might release a bigger version later (or you just put
several together). It says "under 100lbs" which is less than half the
weight of the proposed 52KW so the energy density isn't all that far off-
they apparently just want to start small.
Danny
Roderick Wilde wrote:
Greg, when I first hear of an exciting new product that sounds too good
to be true I first go to Google and read up on the product which many
times is just various articles based on press releases from the company.
The second thing I do is then go to Google and type in the name of the
product again and add the word scam behind it. Not that I think it is a
scam, just so I can read opposing viewpoints. If there are an incredible
amount of opposing viewpoints I start to wonder. I read many of these
posts to help me form an opinion. I suggest that others use this same
process when trying to discern the truth on new products. Here is just
one post of many you may find of interest. It was posted on The Green
Car
Congress web site on 1/17/07 by Roger Pham.
Roderick Wilde
By Roger Pham
"Ceramic capacitors are not known for their high energy storage
capacity.
Barium titanate has been used to make ceramic capacitors for quite
sometimes, and has nowhere near the energy capacity as claimed by EEStor
company.
The claimed 52kwh capacity of the EEstor device having 31 farads is due
to the 3,500 V maximum voltage rating. However, automotive power
inverters and power transformers are typically designed to handle
battery
voltages from 250-500 volts. Since Energy Stored = 1/2 Capacitance x
Voltage Squared, reducing the 3,500V down to a more reasonable 500V will
reduce the storage capacity of the EEstor from 52kwh down to 1kwh.
Otherwise, working with 3,500V in a personal vehicle is very lethal,
especially in the event of an accident. High-voltage capacitors can
explode violently upon aging of the dielectric material or other
stresses
that can lower the dielectric property of the material. In a chain
reaction, the entire energy of this supercapacitor can be released as
fast as a bomb explosion. If you wanna build a thick, thick bomb-proof
casing to contain this 52kwh worth (~140lbs of TNT-equivalent) of energy
that can be released in a flash, you will need a lot of carbon fiber
layers that will be very heavy and costly. You might have better luck
making a Compressed Hydrogen tank out of carbon-fiber reinforcement. H2
by itself without O2 cannot combust. Structural weakness in the carbon
fiber tank may allow the H2 to leak out at a fast rate, but it will not
explode."
Good luck, EEStor. Y'all will need every bit of it!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Watson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:20 AM
Subject: EEstor
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=204515
The first commercial application of the EESU is intended to be used in
electric vehicles under a technology agreement with ZENN Motors
Company.
EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15
kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor
Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles. The production EESU
for ZENN Motor Company will function to specification in operating
environments as sever as negative 20 to plus 65 degrees Celsius, will
weigh less than 100 pounds, and will have ability to be recharged in a
matter of minutes.
Zap, Kapow Batman our offline energy storage problems are over,
Greg
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date:
1/16/2007
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date:
1/18/2007
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Making the dielectricum thinner probably makes the physical
problems even larger - they are already dealing with a
layer that is extremely thin, making it thinner could lead
to quantum-mechanic effects like tunneling through of particles,
which could lead to large leakage currents.
Imagine that their dielectricum today is only 1 micrometer thin
and you want to make it 10x thinner while maintaining the
constant thickness and mechanical properties to avoid may
modules breaking down soon....
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Arthur W. Matteson
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: EEstor
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 19:32 -0800, Cor van de Water wrote:
> Sorry,
>
> switching converters inputs cannot be placed in series
> arrangement, unless you find a way to use input voltage
> feedback, as normally a converter has a negative resistance:
> The current goes up as the voltage goes down.
> This makes for an instable system.
If a purpose-built converter set had a fixed transformer ratio, had
bidirectional capability (needed for regen anyway), and had all their
outputs paralleled, they should be able to be paralleled without any
feedback whatsoever. This isn't necessarily the optimal configuration,
and "seriesing" off-the-shelf products isn't wise.
I don't think dealing with 3500V would be so difficult, despite being an
immense shock hazard. It seems that they must be able to make the
dielectric thinner (or such) to achieve the same result at 350V or so?
- Arthur
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Exactly.
As long as EEstor concentrates on what they do best
(the capacitive energy storage and its issues)
while others tackle the issues surrounding the
application (High Voltage controller, HV charger, etc)
then we can see interesting results soonest.
Imagine a Sunrise with a 300 lb 50 kWh energy pack.
500 miles range easily.
What was the problem with EVs again?
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Roderick Wilde
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EEstor
It is just because it is not rocket science that we have so many choices of
controllers in the EV industry.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cor van de Water" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:20 PM
Subject: RE: EEstor
> Especially a light car needs a very light and preferably small battery,
> while still having a good range is required, so energy storage is a
> big issue for a small car. (pardon the pun)
> EEstor apparently did fit that bill and FGC is the first to take the
> jump.
>
> Actually I have been interested in shopping around for places that
> can do this ceramics/metal deposit and material handling stuff,
> to see if there is a way to make sure these modules will become
> available for EVs, just in case EEstor is gobbled up by someone not
> interested in EVs.
>
> Once these capacitors (not batteries!) become available, the design
> of the necessary electronics is just a matter of work.
> Not trivial, but also not rocket science.
>
> Regards,
>
> Cor van de Water
> Systems Architect
> Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
> Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
> Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
> Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Roderick Wilde
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:11 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: EEstor
>
>
> The really funny thing to me is that their target market and their
> exclusive
>
> marketing agreement is for a 72 volt NEV by Feel Good Cars. Something in
> this picture does not jive in my head. Please go read all the articles you
> can find. The one I posted is one of many as I did say in my post. You may
> want to also research the availability of 3500 volt EV motors or for a
> start
>
> try finding 1000 volt ones. Concerning high voltage, you are correct that
> higher voltage uses smaller gauge wire to achieve the same watts. That is
> why Europe uses half the copper in their homes as the US does which most
> likely amounts to a waste of resources in the amount of millions if not
> billions of tons of copper. I wonder who thought up that brilliant idea.
> Most likely a copper lobby.
>
> Roderick Wilde
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:50 AM
> Subject: Re: EEstor
>
>
>>I have been curious about the safety of 52KW HV cap. Man, the explosive
>>potential could be impressive. Or it may just burn, it's hard to say.
>>
>> The guy is whining about the high voltage. It's a big concern, that's
>> for
>
>> sure, but not insurmountable. What people aren't realizing is EVs really
>> do become more practical at higher voltages and lower current levels.
>> The
>
>> cable needs extra-special insulation but doesn't need to be thick or have
>> ultra-low resistance terminals. At 3500V vs 120V the wire only needs to
>> carry 1/29th the current. 8ga is more than enough. Other things would
>> of
>
>> course need to change, the motor would be wound differently and brush
>> motors may be impossible due to the arcing potential of high voltage.
>>
>> So they're actually putting out a cap, but 15KW instead of 52KW? Well
>> that's the sort of degradation from the initial bold proposal I would
>> expect and they might release a bigger version later (or you just put
>> several together). It says "under 100lbs" which is less than half the
>> weight of the proposed 52KW so the energy density isn't all that far off-
>> they apparently just want to start small.
>>
>> Danny
>>
>> Roderick Wilde wrote:
>>
>>> Greg, when I first hear of an exciting new product that sounds too good
>>> to be true I first go to Google and read up on the product which many
>>> times is just various articles based on press releases from the company.
>>> The second thing I do is then go to Google and type in the name of the
>>> product again and add the word scam behind it. Not that I think it is a
>>> scam, just so I can read opposing viewpoints. If there are an incredible
>>> amount of opposing viewpoints I start to wonder. I read many of these
>>> posts to help me form an opinion. I suggest that others use this same
>>> process when trying to discern the truth on new products. Here is just
>>> one post of many you may find of interest. It was posted on The Green
>>> Car
>
>>> Congress web site on 1/17/07 by Roger Pham.
>>>
>>> Roderick Wilde
>>>
>>> By Roger Pham
>>>
>>> "Ceramic capacitors are not known for their high energy storage
>>> capacity.
>
>>> Barium titanate has been used to make ceramic capacitors for quite
>>> sometimes, and has nowhere near the energy capacity as claimed by EEStor
>>> company.
>>> The claimed 52kwh capacity of the EEstor device having 31 farads is due
>>> to the 3,500 V maximum voltage rating. However, automotive power
>>> inverters and power transformers are typically designed to handle
>>> battery
>
>>> voltages from 250-500 volts. Since Energy Stored = 1/2 Capacitance x
>>> Voltage Squared, reducing the 3,500V down to a more reasonable 500V will
>>> reduce the storage capacity of the EEstor from 52kwh down to 1kwh.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, working with 3,500V in a personal vehicle is very lethal,
>>> especially in the event of an accident. High-voltage capacitors can
>>> explode violently upon aging of the dielectric material or other
>>> stresses
>
>>> that can lower the dielectric property of the material. In a chain
>>> reaction, the entire energy of this supercapacitor can be released as
>>> fast as a bomb explosion. If you wanna build a thick, thick bomb-proof
>>> casing to contain this 52kwh worth (~140lbs of TNT-equivalent) of energy
>>> that can be released in a flash, you will need a lot of carbon fiber
>>> layers that will be very heavy and costly. You might have better luck
>>> making a Compressed Hydrogen tank out of carbon-fiber reinforcement. H2
>>> by itself without O2 cannot combust. Structural weakness in the carbon
>>> fiber tank may allow the H2 to leak out at a fast rate, but it will not
>>> explode."
>>>
>>> Good luck, EEStor. Y'all will need every bit of it!
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Watson"
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:20 AM
>>> Subject: EEstor
>>>
>>>
>>>> http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=204515
>>>>
>>>> The first commercial application of the EESU is intended to be used in
>>>> electric vehicles under a technology agreement with ZENN Motors
>>>> Company.
>
>>>> EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15
>>>> kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor
>>>> Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles. The production EESU
>>>> for ZENN Motor Company will function to specification in operating
>>>> environments as sever as negative 20 to plus 65 degrees Celsius, will
>>>> weigh less than 100 pounds, and will have ability to be recharged in a
>>>> matter of minutes.
>>>>
>>>> Zap, Kapow Batman our offline energy storage problems are over,
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date:
>>>> 1/16/2007
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date:
>> 1/18/2007
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.14/637 - Release Date: 1/18/2007
--- End Message ---
