EV Digest 6339
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Performance lag (Zilla vs Curtis, Warp vs ADC)?
by Ken Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Battery Monitor Design
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) gas station fires??? (was Re: Battery Monitor Design)
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Using Vortex Tubes for air conditioning/heating
by "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Using Vortex Tubes for air conditioning/heating let's keep
this safe!
by "Michaela Merz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Battery Monitor Design
by "Dale Ulan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Goodyear Eagle GA P205/65R15 tires
by bruce parmenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: gas station fires??? (was Re: Battery Monitor Design)
by JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Electric "Jeep", Is this project feasable?
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Battery Monitor Design
by Tim Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) old copper cable recycling (WAS: Re: How Hot Does a Terminal Get? Not
very, it shouldn't!)
by "Chuck Hursch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) KTA Services no longer sells to hobbyists
by "Chuck Hursch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: Testing the pack
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Electric "Jeep", Is this project feasable?
by xx xx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Adrian,
As you've pointed out, that sounds like a big difference in power
between the two cars for going up that hill. If it's really true, and
not an instrumentation issue, it seems that you might be able to
drive the hill and then feel the tires (bad alignment), motor, controller,
etc. and something should be hot. The batteries might take
more than one run, depending on the hill length and whether it
is a single battery vs spread out, to feel a temperature difference.
Just a thought,
Ken
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Can't a transorb/MOV on the charger provide decent protection against
this kind of spike?
Actually the problem is a differential between the pack and frame. Now
if the charger is a "bad boy" but with an inductor, light bulb, or some
sort of current limiting element, then I don't see how you'd develop
1000V from + to - on a 10x 12V series of batts. The batts should clamp
the voltage. But the common mode voltage- where both the hot and
neutral- could both spike and reach any voltage without even exceeding
the normal differential voltage from + to - on the batt terminals, thus
the battery offers no clamping effect. I don't know how common this is
though.
The other thing is, is the frame assumed to be grounded? As noted by
these gas station fires, a person or the frame can build up a
significant static charge. In fact I assume driving under certain
conditions (particularly unusual conditions) probably builds up a static
charge on the frame. With no connection between frame and battery there
is a static charge susceptibility.
Now I do understand the shock, leakage, and shorting issues leading to
the floating pack and motor design. It'd be nice to have a transorb/MOV
between the pack and frame but do these ever fail by conducting when
they shouldn't?
Wouldn't it still be an all-around idea to have a nonisolated charger
with transorbs/MOVs from pack to ground to protect against these line
spikes when charging? It won't protect against my static charge while
driving/getting out of the seat theoretical prob, but it should be
strong line protection.
Danny
Lee Hart wrote:
Dale Ulan wrote:
I've used the really fast (10 Mbps) optos for CAN up to 500 kbps and
the phase shifts are ok. But you need to use optos that are really
fast compared to the bit rate - I use a factor of 20 so the time
delay is less than one CAN bit clock. Another option os the ADUM140x
family of isolators, if the differential voltage is going to be under
500V (which it should be).
If you use a non-isolated charger, then you are effectively connecting
your propulsion pack to the AC power line during charging. The AC
power line can be exceedingly noisy; depending on your location, 1000v
spikes are a daily occurrence, and 6000v spikes can occur during
thunderstorms.
If you use an isolated charger, then power line surges no longer get
to the battery pack. Your worst-case transients will be those produced
within the vehicle itself. But if you are careless with your wiring
practices, these can still be quite large. They will be produced every
time you start or stop a high current.
For example, if the main contactor closes without precharging the
controller, a huge current surge flows from the batteries to
"instantly" charge the capacitors in the controller. Or, if the main
contactor has to open under fault conditions when the motor is running
at high current, you get a huge inductive voltage spike.
Most propulsion packs are not ground referenced (i.e. not grounded;
floating). This means a voltmeter connected between ground and any
propulsion battery shows essentially no voltage, because there is no
path for current to flow between them. Since it's an open circuit,
even electrostatic charges can produce a very large voltage difference
between them and ground. But large voltage difference can't supply any
current, so there's no shock hazard from touching a battery terminal
and ground.
The system you have built assumes that the pack is ground referenced,
i.e. that something somewhere is connected between pack and ground. It
might be an actual wire from pack negative to ground, or a resistance
somewhere between pack and ground. This might be a physical resistor,
or just random leakage resistance in some component. You need this
resistance to be low enough to keep the voltage between the pack and
ground to less than the differential amplifier's voltage rating (500v).
Personally, I would rather isolate the pack from ground, and let the
differential amplifiers, multiplexers, and A/D converters "float". Use
optical isolators to transfer the digital output from the A/Ds to your
controller and display, which can be powered off the grounded 12v
system. This would make it far less likely to be damaged if there are
voltage transients that exceed 500v between the pack and ground.
I don't understand the reason for using 1-10 Mbit networking for a
system that measures battery voltages every half second or so. It
seems like a fast network just makes it more expensive and susceptible
to noise.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The other thing is, is the frame assumed to be grounded? As noted by these
gas station fires, a person or the frame can build up a significant static
charge.
??? Has there been a sudden epidemic in gas station fires that I am unaware
of? I know there was a video of one posted on YouTube recently.
Considering the tens of thousands of gas stations and the millions of daily
fillups, I would be willing to bet that statistically you have a much better
chance of your EV catching fire in your garage and burning down your house
than being involved in a gas station fire filling up an ICE.
A few years ago when an EV did burn up in someone's garage there was a lot
of concern on this list that the incident was overplayed in the news, so
lets be fair and admit that it is very rare to have a fire event at a gas
station. Even if it was a common event it would be more fair to compare it
to any fire that was caused by faulty electrical wiring as we claim that one
of the plusses of EV's is that the charging infrastructure is already in
place. Essentially any building with an outlet is equivalent to a gas
station for us.
Now gas powered cars burning up along the side of the rode is a whole
different story. We seem to have several of those events a year here in the
Portland area.
damon
_________________________________________________________________
Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> For dry-air cooling of a machine bit or heat
> directed at small spots, great. Remember
> the noise factor, too.
>
> Chuck Hays
"Remember the noise factor, too." Not to mention all the drag from
scooping that much air. You'd probably do better installing a windmill
atop the car to power your AC pump. <g>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bruce Weisenberger wrote:
> Don't use CO2. Period. Don't use Liquid Nitrogen
> Period.
> If you insist on using these Vortex tubes which are
> specified by the Manufacturer for spot cooling use air
> only. Period.
So far, so good ;)
> Also 3.4K btu is far cry from my cars present AC unit
> which doesn't work to well. Also it has been stated
> many times this will not work as an AC unit as it is
> meant as a spot cooler. Also 3.4 btu of how much sq
> area.
While typical car a/c system produce in the range of 10000 BTUs, they do
have a hot engine in front - something we don't have to take care of.
By the way: One British thermal unit (Btu) is the amount of energy in the
form of heat or cold which will raise/lower the temperature of one pound
of water one degree Fahrenheit. 3,400 BTUs is quite an amount of cooling
power, I'd say it should be about enough to cool a small cab.
mm.
1 kWh = 3,413 Btu
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>I don't understand the reason for using 1-10 Mbit networking for a
>system that measures battery voltages every half second or so. It seems
>like a fast network just makes it more expensive and susceptible to noise.
Just to clarify - I've used isolated 1 Mbit stuff (but for CAN you need to use
10 Mbps isolators to achieve 1 Mbps reliably) - but not for EV battery
monitoring. These were industrial controllers that actually needed that speed.
I was even more paranoid on that industrial application - I had the A-D
converter isolated from the processor, and the CAN bus isolated from the
processor as well.
If you are using CAN bus for other things on the vehicle (as many newer
vehicles tend to do), then you may have a 1 Mbps CAN network running through
the vehicle already (ABS, traction control, signal and brake lamps,
instrumentation, and diagnostics may be on the same bus), so adding a battery
monitor that measures and tosses stuff onto that existing network wiring may
make sense, even though strictly for the battery monitor function you don't
need that speed.
-Dale
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Ted,
That is what I needed to know. If these tires work OK for your EV,
then I should be OK.
The tires I currently have are not LLR tires either. My losses are
higher, but tolerable for now.
Thanks for your help.
Bruce {EVangel} Parmenter
' ____
~/__|o\__
'@----- @'---(=
. http://geocities.com/brucedp/
. EV List Editor, RE & AFV newswires
. (originator of the above ASCII art)
===== Undo Petroleum Everywhere
____________________________________________________________________________________
The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 12:02 PM 1/24/2007, Roland Wiench wrote:
I am running a Warp 9 with a Z1K with a 180V Trojan T-145 with no problems
at all. The Warp 9 is a temporary replacement while my GE 11 is in
maintenance.
What kind of vehicle? (Frontal area? LRR tires?)
My EV weighs 7150 lbs that has a overall 1st gear ratio of 19.5:1 that I can
accelerated as fast it can go, about 0-30 mph in about 10 seconds. The
maximum motor ampere I pull is about 500 amps which peaks for about a
second, than falls to about 200 amps at 25 mph which is about 6000 rpm.
So you are generally staying down almost within Curtis Amp possibilities.
The GE-11 at 60 mph has a battery 180 amps while the Warp-9 is about 260
battery amps.
This seems like an awfully large difference! Is the pack sagging a
lot more with the Warp-9?
It would be preferred to use two Warp 9 in series, or one Warp 11 which will
be my next mod. The Warp 9 continuous ampere rating is 199 amps.
Seems like making full use of a transmission is saving you quite a bit.
A warp 9 is less expensive than 2 L91's. Hmmm..
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
damon henry wrote:
??? Has there been a sudden epidemic in gas station fires that I am
unaware of? I know there was a video of one posted on YouTube
recently. Considering the tens of thousands of gas stations and the
millions of daily fillups, I would be willing to bet that
statistically you have a much better chance of your EV catching fire
in your garage and burning down your house than being involved in a
gas station fire filling up an ICE.
---------------------------------
I have been watching automotive/truck fires on the Los Angeles freeway
system for about 6 months. There seems to be more than one a week.
I have seen a statistic that there is a gas station fire once a day
somewhere in the U.S.
But when you see a refinery or tanker fire, it probably makes auto fires
insignificant.
I wonder how many traffic deaths are due to fire.
John in Sylmar, CA
PV EV
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi John and All,
First let me ask, Why???
What do you need to do that an E-10, ect, can't
at a much lower conversion, running cost? What top speed??
Assuming you want real power for lower amounts
of money, 4 motors combined into a Contactor Controller will
get you there. Since you are going to be low powered for the
weight, your acceleration is really digital, on or off so E
controller really doesn't give you much, especially for the
price. You get 3 speeds S/P the motors, a resistor speed
that if you keep the trans, should be all you need, taking 3
DPDT, 2 SPST. Just let the motors wind out before you switch
to the next step gives you a smooth acceleration, like
shifting a gear, only smoother.
If you still want an E controller, try 2
Navitas TSE600-96, $850 each, using 2 packs of 96vdc nom
T125's driving 4 D+D ES21's/A89's,$475-50lbs each, 2 motors
per controller which supports series/parallel like the Zilla
does giving you 2400 motor amps of torque for starting,
600amps per motor on a beer budget!! ;^D This with 8
Orbitals would make a hot drag racer in a smaller car, rail.
The ES21 at 96vdc make 8 hp cont, 40 peak or so
each. By using more motors you actually increase power
because they have more surface area to disipate heat,
leading to higher real cont hp numbers vs 1 or 2 larger
ones. Any EV that needs more than 32hp cont is going to kill
any battery pack.
Mating is fairly easy, just use the belt
sprocket to join the motors face to face, belt each pair to
the trans, drive shaft or rear axle.
But let's get back to your problem. Much
cheaper is find a El Camino, Ranchro body and replace the
cab, bed with it, dropping weight and better aero.
especially with their matching camper shells.. Or the front
and passenger compartment of many aero kit, reg cars, maybe
with an aero shell on the back.
With the Ford chassis, an aero body and the
above 4 motors, CC or TSE600 controllers and 2 96vdc packs
of T125's and then you might really have something at a much
lower cost. But doing a stock energy pig like a F250 is
starting with 2.5 strikes against you.
Jerry Dycus
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Subject: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:57:29 -0800
>Okay, for a Heavy Truck
>For UVE's calc, Non-aero small truck, 36 sq ft frontal
>area. Using a 2007 (not likely!) F250 SuperCab LongBed,
>5.4L V8. 5856 lb base weight.
>(I've been having trouble finding this kind of info on
>older models.)
>
>Starting out with a Z2K and Dual 11" motors would be nice,
>but is awfully expensive, and there is a hefty lead time.
>($4500 + 2 * $2950) = $10,400.
>I was thinking of a 240V pack using 6V golf cart batteries.
>
>We've been discussing alternate configurations using some
>Curtis 1221C controllers.
>Curtis 1221C + ADC L91-4003, $975 + $840. Thats 400A (max,
>I know, derate for continuous) at 120V.
>
>One suggestion was to use ADC X91-4001 motors for $855
>instead. Hmm, but the KTA page shows those as lower HP both
>peak and continuous? It also shows the L91's as having
>dual shafts?
>
>So, sticking with the L91's for now.
>I was thinking of a configuration of 2 Curtis 1221C's, each
>with it's own motor. That's not enough power for
>accelerating such a heavy vehicle though.
>So, add a pair of L91's using a simple contactor
>controller. Say, configure the battery pack as a 120V pack
>of buddy pairs. (same amount of battery as the 240V pack)
>Then when you need "turbo boost" acceleration, you use
>contactors to put the 2 boost motors in series or parallel
>on the pack. Gives you 2 boost speeds, and keeps the pack
>balanced.
>
>Cost here is (2 * 975) + (4 * 840) = $5310 about 1/2 the
>cost of the (MUCH NICER) Z2K setup.
>Advantages: All parts available quickly, even if something
>fails, you can continue driving with less power.
>Disadvantages: Complexity, Jerky boost acceleration, still
>may not be good acceleration.
>
>Now, as an added refinement/complexity, if you want to
>prevent motor over-heating while cruising at speed, you
>could use Yet More contactors to switch the boost motors
>to be paralleled with the curtis motors. (and no, they
>would NOT also be directly connected to the pack at that
>time, sheesh.) This would result in each Curtis
>controller driving 2 paralleled motors. Hopefully the same
>overall power, but distributed over 2 motors to improve
>cooling.
>
>Another variation would be to replace the pair of Curtis
>controllers with a Z1K-HV.
>Advantage: Higher current capability, better controller,
>automatic S/P switching.
>Disadvantage: $600 more, and you are back to the very long
>lead time (if available at all).
>
>Of course, once you switch to a single controller, using a
>FB1-4001A at $1485 is cheaper than a pair of L91's.
>
>But a Z1K with S/P switching of a pair of FB1-4001A's may
>not have enough accel?
>Cost = $2550 + (2 * 1485) = $5520.
>So is similar to the original dual Curtis setup with 4
>motors, but you loose the "turbo boost" option.
>
>I'm just trying to see all the options. Moving this heavy
>a truck is a non-trivial exercise.
>
>
>--
>John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
>http://www.CasaDelGato.com
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello John,
The EV is a El Camino body on a modified frame and suspension system with
bearings design for 22,000 lbs and thrust of 4000 lbs.
The tires are Pirelli Scorpion ATR with a load rating of 2350 lbs at 65 psi.
That are mounted on HD wheels rated for 3500 lbs. These tires have a very
stiff 6 ply face to maintain it roundness, while the side walls are a very
soft 2 ply polyester that flex while the face remains round.
It is a very aggressive tire that can go through a foot or more of snow with
no trouble.
The load on the rear wheels is at 2350 lbs, so I am air to the maximum for a
tire face deflection of 5 percent of the 5 inch height of the sidewall.
This is as close as to a LRR tire I can get for a 15 inch tire for this type
of load.
To chose a tire for a EV, you cannot go by how it looks on light weight
alloy wheels. Most of these tires and wheels combinations are about 1300 to
1600 lbs rating.
The last set of tires which were Dunlap 2640 lb load rating at 65 psi 8 ply
rating that were install in 1985, started out as 17/32 thread depth and worn
down to 9/32 in 2006.
Only Pierelli and Goodyear still makes only two models of tires with this
load range for a 15 inch wheel.
The later pickups now have 16 and 18 inch tires, so you should not have any
trouble finding a stiff face 6 or 8 ply rating that maintains it roundness
while the sidewall does the deflection instead of the face of the tire.
I tested out the rolling resistance of this tire, by installing a torque
wrench on the pilot shaft drive on the main motor.
This is a INCH LB TORQUE WRENCH, not a foot lb torque wrench. On a flat
floor, in 1st gear it took 8 inch lbs to move the EV, in 2nd gear, it took
12 inch lbs and in third gear it was about 20 inch lbs.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
> At 12:02 PM 1/24/2007, Roland Wiench wrote:
> >I am running a Warp 9 with a Z1K with a 180V Trojan T-145 with no
> >problems
> >at all. The Warp 9 is a temporary replacement while my GE 11 is in
> >maintenance.
>
> What kind of vehicle? (Frontal area? LRR tires?)
>
> >My EV weighs 7150 lbs that has a overall 1st gear ratio of 19.5:1 that I
> >can
> >accelerated as fast it can go, about 0-30 mph in about 10 seconds. The
> >maximum motor ampere I pull is about 500 amps which peaks for about a
> >second, than falls to about 200 amps at 25 mph which is about 6000 rpm.
>
> So you are generally staying down almost within Curtis Amp possibilities.
>
> >The GE-11 at 60 mph has a battery 180 amps while the Warp-9 is about 260
> >battery amps.
>
> This seems like an awfully large difference! Is the pack sagging a
> lot more with the Warp-9?
>
> >It would be preferred to use two Warp 9 in series, or one Warp 11 which
> >will
> >be my next mod. The Warp 9 continuous ampere rating is 199 amps.
>
> Seems like making full use of a transmission is saving you quite a bit.
> A warp 9 is less expensive than 2 L91's. Hmmm..
> --
> John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream.... http://www.CasaDelGato.com
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John G. Lussmyer wrote:
> >The GE-11 at 60 mph has a battery 180 amps while the Warp-9
> >is about 260 battery amps.
>
> This seems like an awfully large difference! Is the pack sagging a
> lot more with the Warp-9?
There is clearly something very suspect about Roland's numbers.
Neglecting sag, this suggests that just changing his motor has caused
the vehicle to consume 19HP more power at 60MPH.
If we guess that his large 11" GE was running near peak efficiency, and
WAG that as about 88%, then the 32.4kW input (180V @ 180A) resulted in
28.5kW of mechanical output. This is what the vehicle requires to move
60MPH and should not change with a change of motor. If the Warp 9 is
consuming 46.8kW (180V @ 260A) to move the car at the same speed, then
it is running at 61% efficiency and dissipating about 14kW more heat
than the GE. (Yes, the battery likely sags a bit more at 260A than 180A,
so the difference will be a bit less than this, but its good enough for
a first approximation.)
This seems *very* unlikely. More likely is that something else has
changed about the vehicle that results in it requiring more power to
hold 60MPH than Roland measured back when the GE was installed, but even
there, 19HP more is rather suspicious even if some of it is due to the
smaller motor being a few points less efficient....
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John G. Lussmyer wrote:
> Using a 2007 (not likely!) F250 SuperCab LongBed, 5.4L V8. 5856 lb
> base weight.
> I was thinking of a 240V pack using 6V golf cart batteries.
Assuming you can somehow get to a converted weight of 5000lbs w/o
batteries (difficult to impossible even with replacing the box with a
flat bed, etc.), then you're looking at a curb weight of 7480-7880lbs
depending on whether you fit 40 x T105 at the "light" end, or 40 x T145
at the heavy end.
> One suggestion was to use ADC X91-4001 motors for $855 instead.
> Hmm, but the KTA page shows those as lower HP both peak and
> continuous? It also shows the L91's as having dual shafts?
Yes, the X91 is rated for 10HP cont vs 13HP for the L91. EV Parts lists
the L91 as single shaft and the X91 as dual. Perhaps KTA and EV Parts
have different supplies on hand, or perhaps one of the websites is in
error, or ???
The main reason for suggesting the X91 is that it produces the most
torque per amp of any of the options (at least with the lowish current
available from the Curtii), and it seems to me that in any given gear
the motor(s) that provide the greatest torque are going to provide you
with the best acceleration at whatever speed you are moving. The EV
drag racers seem to have quite effectively demonstrated how performance
at speed may depend on peak HP, but acceleration depends on peak torque.
> So, sticking with the L91's for now.
> I was thinking of a configuration of 2 Curtis 1221C's, each with it's
> own motor.
Based on the assumption that a 240V string of GCs would sag to about
120V @ 1000A, we get a ballpark value of 0.003 ohms per battery. Using
this value, a 120V buddy-paired string would sag to 96V under the 800A
peak load of a pair of Curtii and results in a peak battery HP of 103HP
being available.
An L91 @400A develops 60ft-lb and 42HP, so a pair would yield a *peak*
of 84HP and 120ft-lb in this configuration.
An X91 @ 400A develops 87ft-lb and 36HP, so a pair would yield 174ft-lb
and 72HP. Despite the lower peak HP, it seems this option would
actually get you off the line and through an intersection quickest.
A pair of FB1's (9") @ 400A develops 160ft-lb and 100HP. With 286lbs of
motor vs 164lbs, this combination is much less likely to overheat,
despite being able to accelerate the truck more quickly than the pair of
L91's. The battery HP available would likely limit the peak HP below
the 100HP that the motors are capable of.
> So, add a pair of L91's using a simple contactor controller.
> Say, configure the battery pack as a 120V pack of buddy pairs. (same
> amount of battery as the 240V pack)
> Then when you need "turbo boost" acceleration, you use contactors to
> put the 2 boost motors in series or parallel on the pack. Gives you
> 2 boost speeds, and keeps the pack balanced.
>
> Cost here is (2 * 975) + (4 * 840) = $5310 about 1/2 the cost of the
> (MUCH NICER) Z2K setup.
You forgot to include the cost of the contactors. At a minimum you need
4 SW-200's at $128 a pop, for $512 more cost.
Using our 0.003 ohms per battery, the 120V buddy-paired pack sags to 72V
under the 1600A peak load (assuming you are able to force 400A through
each of 4 motors). This is a peak available battery HP of 154HP.
4 L91's @ 400A will develop a total (peak) of 240ft-lbs and 168HP, but
they can't do this with only 154HP available from the battery, so you
are battery-limited to about 123HP (154HP * 80% efficiency) peak.
4 X91's @ 400A will develop 348ft-lb and 144HP, but again the battery
limits you to about 123HP from the motors (though with the X91's this HP
will be at higher torque and lower RPM than for the L91's).
2 FB1's @ 400A will develop 160ft-lb and 100HP, which is within the
battery capabilities.
> Another variation would be to replace the pair of Curtis controllers
> with a Z1K-HV.
With the 40 batteries configured as a single 240V string, and assuming
it sags to 120V @ 1000A, this results in a peak of 161HP being available
from the same battery pack.
At 600A, a pair of X91's yields 228ft-lbs and 98HP; a pair of L91's
yields 112ft-lbs and 114HP; and, a pair of FB1's yields 280ft-lbs and
126HP.
At 750A, a pair of L91's yields 300ft-lbs and 130HP. Extrapolating to
1000A suggests 400ft-lbs. Due to motor inefficiency at this current,
we're probably going to be bumping into the battery power limit already.
At 900A, a pair of FB1's yields 450ft-lbs and 168HP, but once again we
will be battery-limited to something a bit lower in peak HP.
Extrapolating to 1000A suggests 500ft-lbs.
> Advantage: Higher current capability, better controller, automatic
> S/P switching.
Also allows configuring the pack as higher voltage which results in
greater peak HP and a wider powerband from the motors. The higher motor
current allows *greater* torque from a pair of L91s than you can get
from 4 of them on 120V at 400A each, and a pair of FB1's with the Z1K
develops significantly more torque than is possible with quad L91's or
X91's @ 400A, or than a pair of FB1's with a pair of 120V Curtii.
> Disadvantage: $600 more, and you are back to the very long lead time
> (if available at all).
The long lead time is really the only issue here. The $600 premium for
the HV Zilla over the LV model is approximately what you would spend in
contactors if you tried to do the boost arrangement, and dropping back
to a pair of FB1's from quad L91's saves money.
> But a Z1K with S/P switching of a pair of FB1-4001A's may not have
> enough accel?
You can certainly work the math more thoroughly if you wish, but it
looks to me like the Z1K w/dual FB1's has the best likelihood of
satisfying your needs. If it can't do it, the quad smaller motors
certainly won't and your only real option is to move up to a Z2K.
Note that even with a Z2K your real performance limit is the battery HP;
you won't be able to run 2000A on the battery side, and conventional
wisdom would have it that you really ought to limit the floodeds to
about 500A max if you want them to last. Using the same WAG of 0.003
ohms per battery, this suggests a peak of 180V @ 500A or 121HP being
available from the battery. This is really your hard limit; if ~100HP
(120 x 80%) isn't going to be enough to give the performance required in
a vehicle this heavy, you need to resign yourself to shorter battery
life and turn up the screws. Of course, even at 1000 battery amps
you're only looking at 161HP, or about 120HP at the motor output
(assuming 75% efficiency at the higher motor current). If this isn't
going to give adequate performance there's nothing you can do adding
motors or contactors that will significantly change the situation.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Being one who has done very serious off road electric four wheeling in the
Sedona, Arizona red rock area as well as Moab, Utah and Washington State I
would highly recommend that you keep your transmission. You will need to
carry a lot of battery weight to get your desired range. The range would be
very doable with extremely expensive batteries. Check out pictures of our
four wheel drive electric British Land Rover at The Jeep Safari Weekend in
Moab, Utah and our trip from Grand Junction, Colorado through the mountains
to Moab and even fording a river with the motor totally submerged. This trip
was written up in Four Wheeler Magazine as well as LRM (Land Rover Magazine)
from England. We also climbed a hill in Moab that only one in fifty ever
make it up and most of those are rigs worth over fifty thousand dollars.
Electric four wheeling is almost as fun as EV racing!
Roderick Wilde
EV Parts, Inc.
www.evparts.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "xx xx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:45 AM
Subject: Electric "Jeep", Is this project feasable?
Greetings all,
I've been researching my conversion for a while and
would like some experienced input as to how rational
of a conversion this would be.
The basic parts I have are as follows:
A frame from an 86 full size chevy blazer, stripped,
sandblasted and painted.
14 bolt rear axle and Dana 44 front axle both running
4:10 gears. Rear axle has a locker.
35 inch tires on aluminum rims.
Dana 20 2 speed transfer case.
Fiberglass Jeep Wrangler body, or home made fiberglass
body.
I'd like to eliminate using a transmission and connect
directly to the transfer case and use the 2:1
reduction as my low gear when needed.
I'm not sure what the final weight would be with
batteries, I'm hoping less than 4,000lbs.
This would not be a daily driver, but would be road
legal. I'd need at least 50 mile range, maybe 15-20
of it would be around 40-50mph getting to and from
trails, the rest low speed 4 wheeling.
I'm thinking of a warp11 with a Z1k for now, maybe
upgrading to a Z2k at some point, (when I have more
money), could I get by with a warp9? Do I need to go
for the Z2K right away?
Basically how much battery/motor/controller would I
need for decent hill climbing/mud crawling performance
and how much do you think this thing would weigh given
the above information? I'd be using AGM or better
batteries.
Thanks,
John
____________________________________________________________________________________
Bored stiff? Loosen up...
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.8/649 - Release Date: 1/23/2007
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.8/649 - Release Date: 1/23/2007
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Lee -
I talked to another evlist member, and he suggested using a small 12V-12V DC/DC
converter on the sense boards like this TRC electronics number SUCS31212C:
http://www.trcelectronics.com/Cosel/sucs31212c.shtml
or this C&D converter number NDTD1212C:
http://www.mouser.com/search/ProductDetail.aspx?R=NDTD1212Cvirtualkey58010000virtualkey580-NDTD1212C
Is this what you meant by isolating the system? It seems like a nice method
that I should have thought of, but didn't.
Thanks,
Tim
>Personally, I would rather isolate the pack from ground, and let the
>differential amplifiers, multiplexers, and A/D converters "float". Use
>optical isolators to transfer the digital output from the A/Ds to your
>controller and display, which can be powered off the grounded 12v
>system. This would make it far less likely to be damaged if there are
>voltage transients that exceed 500v between the pack and ground.
>
>I don't understand the reason for using 1-10 Mbit networking for a
>system that measures battery voltages every half second or so. It seems
>like a fast network just makes it more expensive and susceptible to noise.
>--
>Ring the bells that still can ring
>Forget the perfect offering
>There is a crack in everything
>That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
>--
>Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am generating some used cable as I am going through my pack,
putting new cables in to replace the old ones that were getting
hot (which were most all of the cables made at the installation
of the second pack in my car some five years ago - apparently
defective cable that had some oxidation on the strands - I'll try
to post about that some other time). The point of this post is
that a fellow EV'er (and I believe he is on the EVDL also)
prompted me to think about recycling that cable, when I mentioned
I was going to throw the old stuff out. Well, I called my local
recycler, Marin Recycling (Marin is the county where I live), and
they gave me a price of 58 cents/pound, with the insulation
removed from the cable. I doubt it's going to be more than a
couple of pounds with the insulation off. Even if it was ten
pounds, it would barely be worth my time to slice the insulation
off the copper and drive it to the recycling place. There's just
not that much of it. Anybody have different numbers/pound?
Thanks,
Chuck
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Was all set to order some parts from KTA, dialed up their #, and
got a recording that they no longer sell to hobbyists. Checked
my EVDL archives, and I see no posting about this, and from the
looks of the postings, nobody has been aware of this, at least to
the extent of posting about it. That's a shame! I really
enjoyed working with Ken Koch. He was always friendly, willing
to explain EV concepts and issues to you, and gave good service.
Tell me I'm having a bad dream! Did I get out of bed today?
Pinch self... Yep, am wide awake. I think KTA is going towards
working with OEM and the like, from what I remember of the voice
message. The phone is 909-949-7914 - check it out for yourself.
Chuck
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John,
1. El Camino, see EValbum nr 470:
http://evalbum.com/470
2. Battery sag does not impact motor amps (as long as battery
voltage is higher than motor voltage), only motor inductance,
RPM and efficiency do.
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 John G. Lussmyer
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 1:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Alternate configurations for Heavy Vehicle
At 12:02 PM 1/24/2007, Roland Wiench wrote:
>I am running a Warp 9 with a Z1K with a 180V Trojan T-145 with no problems
>at all. The Warp 9 is a temporary replacement while my GE 11 is in
>maintenance.
What kind of vehicle? (Frontal area? LRR tires?)
>My EV weighs 7150 lbs that has a overall 1st gear ratio of 19.5:1 that I
can
>accelerated as fast it can go, about 0-30 mph in about 10 seconds. The
>maximum motor ampere I pull is about 500 amps which peaks for about a
>second, than falls to about 200 amps at 25 mph which is about 6000 rpm.
So you are generally staying down almost within Curtis Amp possibilities.
>The GE-11 at 60 mph has a battery 180 amps while the Warp-9 is about 260
>battery amps.
This seems like an awfully large difference! Is the pack sagging a
lot more with the Warp-9?
>It would be preferred to use two Warp 9 in series, or one Warp 11 which
will
>be my next mod. The Warp 9 continuous ampere rating is 199 amps.
Seems like making full use of a transmission is saving you quite a bit.
A warp 9 is less expensive than 2 L91's. Hmmm..
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Matt,
If you have a lab supply (selectable voltage/amp limit) or an
isolated battery charger, then you can connect it to a battery
in your pack, as long as you are aware of the dangers of hooking
it up in a wrong way (wrong voltage, reversed).
You may want to connect through a fuse of the max amps you use.
For that reason I always use thin wires that barely can take
the few amps that I send through them from the power supply,
but in this way if I make a mistake there will not be a plasma
ball (like when I measured my pack voltage with the multimeter
in Amp mode), only a burnt wire.
Supplemental charging can take a while, dependent where you start.
If you first charge the pack, then measure the batt voltages and
change the laggards afterwards, it can take several hours per
batt to see them taper down from several amps to around 1/2A at
14.8V, which is when I stop.
Don't feel bad about asking questions - it is the only way to
expand your knowledge quickly. It is also one of the main
purposes of this list.
And a question about battery charging is certainly *not* OT
and your question is within context of the subject.
Success,
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 Matt Kenigson
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:32 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Testing the pack
This is a *little* bit off of the subject, but here's another newb
question: How are you doing supplemental charging? Should I get an
external charger for just such a need? When I do supplemental charging
should the battery be isolated from the pack or can I just hook up the
charger to the batt with all the other wiring still in place.
Sorry for questions I might be able to find by searching the archives. I've
found it difficult to answer the simplest questions that way, although for
complex questions, the archives rock! Anyway, I feel like I'm slowly
catching on as I am well into ruining my first pack (although it was in
pretty bad shape when I got it, anyway, so I don't feel too bad about
learning the hard way).
Matt K.
> Hi all,
> >
> > You will have to forgive me for asking a basic question. I have
> searched
> > around, but have not really got a clear understanding.
> >
> > Every couple of months I check my pack to see if any batteries are low.
> > Here is what I do:
> >
> > I charge my pack
> > Wait 24 hours
> > Measure each battery voltage
> > Supplemental charge the low ones.
> >
> > I get the feeling, after readying a few posts about dead packs, that
> this
> > procedure is wrong. Can anyone please correct me?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the reply. Your Rover was one of the
vehicles I've seen that made me think my Jeep might be
possible.
> I
> would highly recommend that you keep your
> transmission.
I was afraid of this. I was hoping to drop the trans
to save weight, and because my trans is an auto so
I'll have to get a manual, but that's not a big
problem.
> You will need to
> carry a lot of battery weight to get your desired
> range. The range would be
> very doable with extremely expensive batteries.
Can you be more specific? Battery type, quantity, and
cost?
I'd like more info about your Rover. What's it weigh,
what motor are you using, what kind of range do you
get, etc. I see you also use a generator as a range
extender, something I've also considered.
Also I see that you use an alternator for regen, which
I also considered essential for a heavy off roader.
What's the capacity of that alternator? Are you using
an A/C type drive clutch to disengage the belt when
not needed? How much power do you think the pulleys
cost you when disengaged?
Maybe you have a page which describes all this but I
couldn't find it.
Thanks,
John
____________________________________________________________________________________
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265
--- End Message ---
