EV Digest 6377
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Wooden battery spacers
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: New Body Wrap
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: New Body Wrap
by "Tom Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: EV digest 6372
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Wood Battery Boxes
by "Brian M. Sutin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: trojan price increase 150%?
by "FRED JEANETTE MERTENS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
by Kenneth Dove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: EV digest 6372
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
by "Stuart Friedrich and Wendy Lyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Corrosion Inhibitors
by "Brian M. Sutin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) The Series Hybrid Debate
by Joseph Lado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Corrosion Inhibitors
by "Bruce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Disconnects. Was: Battery Washing
by "Matt Kenigson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: my battery fire
by "Matt Kenigson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) OT: LPG/LNG/CNG, diesel, enviromnent.
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Richard,
Since you only want to make *spacers*, not entire battery boxes
as most other reply-ers assumed, I think you will find that
wood is very superior, in particular because you are using AGM,
so there is never going to be acid on the outside of your batteries
unless you blow them up. Worst thing normally is venting gas.
I use untreated wood as separators in my alu battery box, to keep
the 70 lbs AGM batteries at regular distance, so the terminals
and wires have room, as the AGMs are lying on their side, with
terminals facing each other, so a wood spacer at the bottom of the
box between the batteries and a wooden spacer on top of the
batteries to keep all clamped down under the edge of the box, plus
a few trimmings pushed down next to the short end to wedge the
battery against the battery box side, so it can't shift around.
I really should reference a photo to make this clear, I guess:
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/img/694/694h.jpg
The two pieces of wood at the left are clamped under the edge of
the box to hold the batteries down.
The pieces in the middle will go next to that middle hump in
the box (driveshaft) to push the batteries against the outside
walls of the box.
Let me know if you have further questions,
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 Richard Rau
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 8:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Wooden battery spacers
In the conversion that I'm now doing, three of the five battery boxes are
designed to hold two levels of batteries. I am now experimenting with
various materials for use as spacers between the lower and upper levels. In
other words, I will be using blocks setting on top of the lower batteries as
supports for the upper ones.
Recent trials with plastics showed interesting results. Polypropylene and
ABS were both stuck to one of polycarbonate battery cases using 3M high
strength adhesive transfer tape. The inexpensive polypropylene did not hold
a bond near as well as the more costly ABS. So ABS wins out for it's
ability to stay put.
After a lot of fussing, my thoughts went back to good ol' wood. It seems
that a solid and stable hardwood would give decent performance if the
environment remained mostly acid free. So I guess that is the question. Is
it unwise for me to consider using this organic material because of its
susceptibility to deterioration? These quality AGM's sure look
unthreatening at this point. What do you think?
Many Kw's of appreciation for your thoughts!
Note- The boxes are vented and I am building a killer charging system that
is a combination of PFC-30 for bulk charging and ventilated Soneil 3-amp
modulars for finishing.
Richard at N.W. Electric Vehicles
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 08:20 PM 2/02/07 -0500, Tom wrote:
Sorry about the post with no link.
Here it is
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/719
G'day Tom
Herself likes it!
What is the hole in the front of the tilt bed for?
Thanks and Regards
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I think you meant "lose"; not loose :-)
>
Yup!
> You are correct on the major points, but the details are important.
> Exactly *how* efficient is the ICE? And at what speeds? Same for the
> electric motor/generators. The details make all the difference in
> whether a hybrid will be more efficient or not.
>
> It seems to me that a hybrid with a big ICE / small electric motor
> favors the parallel approach. Conversely, a hybrid with a big electric
> motor and small ICE favors the series approach.
If the goal is to build a vehicle that does well in stop andc go city
traffic, then a small ICE series hybrid has certain advantages.
If the goal is to build a vehicle that is capable of sustained high speed
travel (like this post started out) then you can NOT get away with a small
ICE.
I'm assuming the original request for 150 kph was intermittent and not
continuous speed. Assuming a more reasonable continuous speed of say 75
mph (~120kph) then to provide enough power to propell the vehicle (~30 hp
at the wheels) as well as overcome conversion losses, the ICE will need to
be at least 40 hp...and that assumes that it won't need to climb any hills
or fight any head wind while going 75 mph.
So 40 hp is a bare minimum (just barely enough) and that's almost as big
as the "big" ICEs in the current small hybrids.
NOw of course someone will argue that you don't need to go 70 mph. Fine,
all well and good, but that means that the parralel hybrids (which only
needed ~30 hp to match the series 40 hp) can ALSO get away with a smaller
ICE and provide the same level of performance as the series hybrid, at
sustained highway speedcs, or whatever sustained speed you want.
>
> All current hybrids are the big ICE / small electric style; so they
> favor parallel hybrids.
>
Undoubably because that is what works best in the real world.
> The ideal platform for a series hybrid would be an electric vehicle,
> plus a tiny ICE that only runs at its peak efficiency point, or is off
> entirely. This tiny ICE is too small to bother to couple it directly to
> the wheels; so it only drives a generator. It's better to think of it as
> a range extender, rather than as something to propel the vehicle all by
> itself.
The excact same tiny ICE would provide better performance in a parallel
hybrid and be able to sustain a higher top speed.
As I've said, the best hybrid, IMHO, uses the ICE directly coupled to the
wheels through an appropriate mechanical transmission (with a clutch), and
has a electric motor in parallel (either powering the same or a different
set of wheels), and also has a generator head on the ICE so you can run in
series mode in those situations that favor it (i.e. real low speed or stop
and go traffic with lots of stop time).
>
> You do have the problems of pollution. If this is a small car, the ICE
> is *really* small -- lawnmower sized. Such engines are usually very
> dirty, and not designed at all to be clean. It's not that it can't be
> done; it's just that no one is trying to do it. The market does not
> require it. I would think the best chance to make a clean small engine
> is to fuel it with something other than gasoline (hydrogen, propane,
> alcohol, etc.)
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There was not enough room ahead of the axle to put 4 batteries on either
side of the prop shaft so I had to set two batteries above the frame. Thus
the hole in the box bottom and the tool box to cover the fact with a hole in
the bottom of that.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Massey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: New Body Wrap
At 08:20 PM 2/02/07 -0500, Tom wrote:
Sorry about the post with no link.
Here it is
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/719
G'day Tom
Herself likes it!
What is the hole in the front of the tilt bed for?
Thanks and Regards
[Technik] James
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.21/665 - Release Date: 2/2/2007
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Check the archives, I've quoted sources numerous times in the past. I
don't currently have acess to my old computer so I don't have them handy,
and I don't feel like looking them up again (try google).
For a start you can check metric mind for the efficeincy curves of their
AC motor system, or check EVparts for the efficiency of series motors.
The AC setup actually peaks at over 90%, but averages somewhat less. THe
series wound motors peak at around 85-96% but average less.
Motors and generators are the same thing, so the better
alternators/generators will have the same basic efficiency as the above
motors. Typical commercial alternators are typically somewhat less
efficient, again check the archives or google it.
It's a bit unusual for someone to be argueing that 15% is too little for
drive train looses, in the past I've had to post sources because most
folks feel it's less than that. Gears can be extreemly efficient, over
99% in some cases. Normal automotive transmission have extra, unused,
gears spinning in oil, and synchros which lowers the efficiency somewhat
as well as the hypoid drive gears in rear wheel drive setups that add a
couple extra % of loss. This is why they are only 85-90% efficeint with
FWD typically being around 90% and RWD around 85%. Automatic
transmissions typically add another 5% or so.
Again check the archives for sources, I'm tired of posting the same info
every year.
> Peter, perhaps the general figures you provide for efficiency and
> emissions are generally accepted.
> * total losses from engine to wheels are somewhere around 10-15% for a
> standard transmission.
> * single ratio transmission losses are around 5-10% between the motor
> and the wheels
> * typical motors and (good) alternators run at around 80-85% efficient
> * genset small motors pollute hundreds of times more than modern
> automotive ICEs
> I don't know, I'm still on the steep part of the learning curve -- it
> would help if you could share your sources.
>
> When you quote numbers without citing sources, and then ask to be proven
> wrong *WITH* cited sources, your point rings hollow...
>> I believe that you are the one who is mistaken... <snip>
>> ...If you can cite some reliable, documented evidence to the
>> contrary, I'd love to see it.
>
> It is not generally necessary to prove ideas false. What is required is
> to demonstrate that they are true. Anyone who argues for an idea must be
> prepared to support it. No idea is valid -- or invalid -- just because
> it can't be disproved.
>
> Any argument that amounts to the statement "prove me wrong" is
> inherently bogus...
> ...and easy to discount.
>
> Randii
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've also seen studies that indicate that modern gas powered cars have
cleaner exhuast than the air in big cities...even when they are being run
in big cities. This means that under certain situations their exhuast is
cleaner than their intake.
When the exhuast fro a modern car is pretty miniscule to begin with, it's
hard to get "much" cleaner. On the other hand, it's relatively easy to
get worse.
FWIW when running a propane fueled vehicle indoors, it MUST be a well
ventilate area and it's generally "large," well ventilated areas.
"Forklifts powered by propane, gasoline, and to a lesser degree diesel
fuel, significantly contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) hazards in the
workplace. Propane fuelled vehicles also emit potentially dangerous
nitrogen dioxide (NO2)."
http://www.labour.gov.sk.ca/safety/forklifts/section-c.htm
"In 1998, the Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) and
Iowa State University (ISU) Extension Department, with the
assistance of local health departments, investigated a
series of carbon monoxide (CO) poisonings associated with
the use of liquified petroleum gas (LPG)-powered forklifts
in light industry. In each episode, forklifts emitting high
CO concentration levels were operated in inadequately
ventilated warehouse and production facilities, which
resulted in high CO accumulations. "
http://list.mc.duke.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9912&L=occ-env-med-l&P=14762
(isn't google fun?)
> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>> CNG/Propane is cleaner, when porperly tuned using all that expensive
>> emmisions testing equipment, but even then I don't think it's "Much"
>> cleaner.
>
> Anecdotal evidence: CNG and propane fueled vehicles are run indoors all
> the time. It is apparently legal and safe. I haven't seen any studies
> linking indoor CNG or propane vehicles to any increased risks of health
> problems. This makes me suspect they are *cleaner* than even the
> cleanest gasoline engines, which are *not* allowed to run indoors.
>
> Heck, my local convenience store even uses a propane fueled floor
> cleaner! The store isn't any bigger than my house!
> --
> 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
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
When I got my EV, it had wooden battery boxes already well soaked in
acid. I soaked them even more. They probably spent several years
soaking in acid. When I changed out the lead for Nicads, I filled the
boxes with sodium bicarb and water. They bubbled and fizzed for days.
In the end, I detected no visible signs of damage.
Just an anecdote for the wars.
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 ---
battery prices went thru the rof because of China and India
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 8:41 AM
Subject: trojan price increase 150%?
My vehicle repair just jumped 150%
Is this true for anyone else.?
I purchased 1 Trojan T-125 3 months ago for $85
The same store just quoted me $140 per battery (and that's not even with
the post I want).
I'm tempted to just drop the 3 batteries entirely and run at 138 Volts
(compared to 156) if I could figure the easiest way to reset the Zivan
without the $140 for roundtrip shipping and California Zivan to reprogram
it. Other recomendations?
What happened?! to battery pricing?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Aw, come on guys, you can do pages of calculations on EVs and not for an ICE
trailer? :)
Figure the trailer adds 10% weight to the Tzero. Now the 0 to 60 acceleration
time will be about 10% slower (v = at, 10% more mass = 10% slower). Not figured
in is the trailer tongue will weigh down the rear wheels a bit, regaining a
little bit of the acceleration.
0 to 60 in 3.6 seconds without the trailer
0 to 60 in about 3.96 seconds with the trailer
If the trailer slows the Tzero by 10% it is still easily Porsche, Corvette, and
Ferrari territory.
Even if the trailer slows the Tzero by 20% (4.3 seconds now) that's still
Porsche and Corvette (non Z06) territory.
Peter, how fast does your 35 mpg Porsche do 0 to 60?
Another Devil's advocate: There are Corvette Z06 owners that claim to get an
honest 30 mpg gently driven on the highway, and can do less than 4.0 seconds to
60.
The Tzero is an incredible machine, too bad the sales price isn't a zero
shorter! At least the Teslas is less than 1/2 the price.
----- Original Message ----
From: Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 4:50:52 PM
Subject: Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
[playing devils advocate]
My Porche gets 35 mpg on the highway and doesn't have to pull a trailer to
do it. How well (speed acceleartion) does the AC propulsion hybrid
perform while towing the trailer, compared to say a Porsche, Ferarri, or
Corvette?
> The AC propulsion series hybrid got 30 to 35 mpg (per wikipedia).
> Considering it was a small, 2500 lb sportscar, maybe not so good, say
> compared to an Insight or Prius. Considering that it was as fast as a
> Ferarri, Porsche, or Corvette, that's awesome!
>
> It had a 500 cc Kawaski motor, so emissions probably weren't too bad. This
> one is probably as good as a series hybrid can get.
----- Original Message ----
Don Cameron wrote:
It begs the question: What was the performance of the T-Zero towing it's
genset? Still as good as the Ferarri, Porsche, or Corvette?
____________________________________________________________________________________
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 ---
Danny Miller wrote:
So what makes you believe that a generator can get nearly twice
the shaft hp-hr out of gas than a car engine to at least break even?
The Prius is interesting because it can be driven as a straight ICE, a
series hybrid, or a parallel hybrid. So, one can do experiments to see
what kind of mileage it gets in each mode. You just have to watch what
it's doing very carefully, and manipulate the accellerator to "trick" it
into running in the desired mode.
Doing this on an informal basis with my own 2001 Prius, it appears to me
that:
1. The highest mpg is obtained with "pulse driving" on the ICE only.
Accelerate just briskly enough so 100% of the ICE power drives
the car, and none is charging the battery. Then let it coast
down with the ICE off and the electric motors not driving the
car. Your speed varies dramatically up/down and drivers behind
you hate your guts -- but you get 100+ mpg.
2. Next highest mpg is parallel mode. The ICE cycles on/off; when on,
it both drives the car and charges the battery. When the ICE is off,
the battery runs the electric motors, and you maintain speed as a
pure electric car. You get 60-80 mpg this way, and can drive at a
constant speed; but must stay under 42 mph (because the ICE won't
shut off above this speed.
3. Next best is series mode. Drive so only the electric motors power
the wheels, and the ICE starts/stops to keep the battery charged.
You get 50-60 mpg this way. Again, you can only do it below 42 mph.
4. The lowest mpg is as a plain old ICE (no hybrid assist at all).
You drive at a constant speed on a level road. The ICE runs
continuously, with whatever amount of throttle it takes to maintain
speed. You get 40-50 mpg this way. You have to drive *faster* than
42 mph to force this mode.
This hints that series hybrids are still an improvement over a straight
ICE, but not as good as a parallel hybrid.
--
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 ---
Personally, I do not want to argue the merits and deficiencies of
parallel and series hybrid configurations.
I do not want a parallel hybrid and would never buy one.
I do not want a 2001 Prius that I have to "pulse" or keep under 42 mph
or over 42 mph or drive in reverse.
What I do want is a series hybrid that can be driven like the Volt for
the first 40 miles in pure EV mode. I would also love to have the EV 1
series hybrid concept that never made it to production.
I also would like a pure electric vehicle with a 200 mile range and all
the accouterments of today's luxury vehicle.
Until I can buy something I want, I guess I have to stick with what I
have and at least console myself with my 60 mpg Suzuki Scooter!
I just cannot see the attraction to a parallel hybrid vehicle where the
driver has no control over the ICE.
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
Check the archives, I've quoted sources numerous times in the past. I
don't currently have acess to my old computer so I don't have them handy,
and I don't feel like looking them up again (try google).
For a start you can check metric mind for the efficeincy curves of their
AC motor system, or check EVparts for the efficiency of series motors.
The AC setup actually peaks at over 90%, but averages somewhat less. THe
series wound motors peak at around 85-96% but average less.
Motors and generators are the same thing, so the better
alternators/generators will have the same basic efficiency as the above
motors. Typical commercial alternators are typically somewhat less
efficient, again check the archives or google it.
It's a bit unusual for someone to be argueing that 15% is too little for
drive train looses, in the past I've had to post sources because most
folks feel it's less than that. Gears can be extreemly efficient, over
99% in some cases. Normal automotive transmission have extra, unused,
gears spinning in oil, and synchros which lowers the efficiency somewhat
as well as the hypoid drive gears in rear wheel drive setups that add a
couple extra % of loss. This is why they are only 85-90% efficeint with
FWD typically being around 90% and RWD around 85%. Automatic
transmissions typically add another 5% or so.
Again check the archives for sources, I'm tired of posting the same info
every year.
Peter, perhaps the general figures you provide for efficiency and
emissions are generally accepted.
* total losses from engine to wheels are somewhere around 10-15% for a
standard transmission.
* single ratio transmission losses are around 5-10% between the motor
and the wheels
* typical motors and (good) alternators run at around 80-85% efficient
* genset small motors pollute hundreds of times more than modern
automotive ICEs
I don't know, I'm still on the steep part of the learning curve -- it
would help if you could share your sources.
When you quote numbers without citing sources, and then ask to be proven
wrong *WITH* cited sources, your point rings hollow...
I believe that you are the one who is mistaken... <snip>
...If you can cite some reliable, documented evidence to the
contrary, I'd love to see it.
It is not generally necessary to prove ideas false. What is required is
to demonstrate that they are true. Anyone who argues for an idea must be
prepared to support it. No idea is valid -- or invalid -- just because
it can't be disproved.
Any argument that amounts to the statement "prove me wrong" is
inherently bogus...
...and easy to discount.
Randii
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
I've also seen studies that indicate that modern gas powered cars
have cleaner exhaust than the air in big cities... even when they
are being run in big cities. This means that under certain situations
their exhaust is cleaner than their intake.
No; it means that the particular pollutants they are measuring happen to
be lower in the car's exhaust than in the surround air.
They're lying with statistics. Figures don't lie; but liars figure. :-)
When the exhaust fro a modern car is pretty miniscule to begin with...
Think so? Try running a car engine, even a Prius engine, in a closed
garage for a while and see how breathable the air is! Yes, the levels of
pollution have improved so you won't die immediately (the Hemlock
Society recommends against trying to kill yourself with it). But it's
still horrible stuff!
it's hard to get "much" cleaner. On the other hand, it's relatively
easy to get worse.
I think it all depends on your definition of "much". The Prius emits
1/10th the pollution of the average new car -- I would call that "much"
lower, even though some of the pollutants went from 1 gram to 0.1 gram
per X amount of time.
"Forklifts powered by propane, gasoline, and to a lesser degree diesel
fuel, significantly contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) hazards in the
workplace. Propane fuelled vehicles also emit potentially dangerous
nitrogen dioxide (NO2)."
http://www.labour.gov.sk.ca/safety/forklifts/section-c.htm
"In 1998, the Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) and
Iowa State University (ISU) Extension Department, with the
assistance of local health departments, investigated a
series of carbon monoxide (CO) poisonings associated with
the use of liquified petroleum gas (LPG)-powered forklifts
in light industry. In each episode, forklifts emitting high
CO concentration levels were operated in inadequately
ventilated warehouse and production facilities, which
resulted in high CO accumulations."
http://list.mc.duke.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9912&L=occ-env-med-l&P=14762
(isn't google fun?)
Good work! As I said, I was just going by anecdotal evidence -- I see
these propane- and CNG-powered vehicles being used indoors all over the
place. I assumed they were relatively safe, or there would be lawsuits
and regulations against them.
The way the above quotations are worded, it sounds like they *may* be a
problem under certain circumstances. I'd guess this would be
sufficiently poor ventilation, and sufficiently "broken" equipment.
--
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 ---
Isn't the recently developed Mini Cooper EV developed by PML a series
hybrid? You didn't mention any cost constraints or a production car, so I
assume this would qualify. By beating the ICE equivalent mpg, I suspect you
mean based only on energy transmitted from the ICE in the hybrid, rather
than also including the stored energy in batteries. In the various
information releases on this car (I believe there are two developed) they
have stated a fuel consumption of 65-80mpg. I expect this includes energy
stored in the batteries, but the Treehugger release indicated that the 2
cylinder ICE in the Mini can provide enough power to maintain speeds of
60-70 mph without further depleting the batteries. It would be interesting
to know what the fuel consumption would be using only ICE power.
From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:40:27 -0700 (MST)
Just to set the record straight, I just remembered one example of a series
hybrid that beat the ICE equivelent.
The DARPA hybrid Humvee. However, they started out with a pig that got
really crappy mileage and created a heavier pig with less payload capacity
that got only poor mileage instead of truely crappy.
Of course they used motors/generators that costs something like $150,000
total.
>
>
>
>>From: Joseph Lado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>How can it put this more clearly? YOU ARE WRONG!!!!! Peter you are one of
>>the people readers look to for answers on this list. You have got to get
>>your numbers straight and really investigate your opinion on this mater,
>>because you don't have it right. Series hybrids are less polluting and
>> are
>>more efficient than using a gasoline engine alone by a factor of three
>>without counting regenerative braking and the advantages of using
>>batteries. With ever improving techniques to recapture wasted energy
>>through the braking process and using the generator only at its optimum
>> to
>>charge the batteries when they go below 40%, you in essence have an
>>electric vehicle that sometimes uses gasoline to either keep going when
>> the
>>batteries are depleated or charge up the batteries when there isn't a
>> plug
>>to be used.
>
> Hi Joseph,
>
> Perhaps you can point me to an example of a series hybrid that has
managed
> to do all of the above successfully. I have yet to see one, especially
> not
> one built in someones garage. The only successfull series hybrids I am
> aware of are the enourmous type used in ships, trains, etc...
>
> I think you may be confusing theory with practice.
>
> damon
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Invite your Hotmail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live
> Spaces
>
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
_________________________________________________________________
Buy, Load, Play. The new Sympatico / MSN Music Store works seamlessly with
Windows Media Player. Just Click PLAY.
http://musicstore.sympatico.msn.ca/content/viewer.aspx?cid=SMS_Sept192006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> The correct procedure is to clean the posts and terminals, assemble them,
> torque
> 'em down, THEN coat with whatever protective substance you decide to
> use...... I
> use axle grease, mainly because I have it. The idea is to keep the acid mist
> and the air OFF your connections.
I always do it in the other order. I slather the No-Ox-Id A-Special all over
all
my connections before I make them. For example, when making cables I remove the
insulation, get corrosion inhibitor all over the end of the cable and the inside
of the connector, and then crimp it. Afterwards, if the connector supports my
hanging weight, I'm done. I got the procedure, along with the recommendation
for
No-Ox-Id A-Special, from a US government publication on power connections in
corrosive environments.
Doing it in the other order might make more sense if you are using grease.
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 ---
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [email protected]
>Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007
1:51:31 PM
>Subject: Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
>...
>Can anyone provide documented evidence of a series hybrid that can beat any
of the >current ICE vehicles?
Proof? You want proof?! I got your proof right here.
New Heavy-Duty Series Hybrid Drives from Enova
(GreenCarCongress)
The driver can
switch off the generator when silent operation is preferred. In an urban
transit or urban delivery cycle, Enovas SERIES HYBRID drive systems are
expected to deliver 4060% in fuel savings, reduced brake maintenance costs,
and significant reduction in NOx, CO,
and PM emissions when compared with conventional internal combustion diesel
powered vehicles in a similar environment. [Not a plug-in]
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/10/new_heavyduty_s.html
Oshkosh Truck
Unveils Series-Hybrid Refuse Vehicle (GreenCarCongress)
We are extremely excited to introduce this remarkable
technology to the refuse market. Our ProPulse hybrid drive system could
significantly reduce fuel costs. During extensive customer field tests, it has
shown improved fuel efficiency of 20 to 50 percent over the typical refuse
trucks. [Series trash truck with no plug-in]
Don Verhoff,
Oshkosh Executive Vice President, Engineering Technology
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/11/oshkosh_truck_u.html
Types of hybrid vehicle (Wikipedia)
The advantage of a series hybrid is the lack of a mechanical
link between the combustion engine and the wheels. The combustion engine runs
at a constant and efficient rate, even as the car changes speed. During
stop-and-go city driving, series hybrids are relatively the most efficient.
A
weakness is that the power from the combustion engine has to run through both
the generator and electric motor. During long-distance highway driving, the
electrical transmission can be less efficient than a conventional transmission.
[only over long distances, The average round-trip commute in the U.S.
is 20 miles according to the 2000 report from the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics and drivers rarely travel over 40 miles a day in a single day]
We all have to realize that the way things are today they
are ass backwards. Internal Combustion Engine cars are less efficient during
the driving that almost all drivers do in comparison to a series hybrid that is
only less efficient in the driving that we dont do but once or twice a year.
For example, where I live the beach is where I most would
want to go as a truly long distance trip. It is about 150 miles away. If I take
my ICE car it would be just a little more efficient than taking my series
hybrid, but my series hybrid is a plug-in hybrid. My first 40 miles are on
electric produced for me I might add from wind through a wind power contract I
have with my utility. The rest of the distance may be less efficient then the
ICE, but I coast a lot when I am going down hills, I stop at places that have
110 outlets to charge up while I am eating, etc. etc. Once my batteries are
over 70% I am back on electric mode not saving gas and not emitting anything.
The
over all use of gasoline is greatly reduced and while I am at the beach I am
back to using all electric plug-in power as I do around my home near the city.
Series
hybrids are a better solution when coupled with a plug. Dont get me started on
the Multi-Fuel Flexible Fuel Series Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle (MFFFPSHV or
Mufpishvee) concept where the vehicle can use any variation of natural gas,
liquid petroleum gas (LPG), gasoline, ethanol and electricity.
http://www.evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?page=blogentry&authorid=46&blogid=192&archive=1
Saying that series hybrids are bad because it isnt perfect
for all situations is like saying that Penicillin is bad because it cant cure
all diseases. We have to shy away from the strong tendency in listserv and
comments to blogs to dominate by rhetorical skill. What we are really after is
a better understanding of what is best. For us on this listserv that believe
that EVs are a solution to many of our problems in terms of security (no
dependence on foreign oil, no money funding terrorism, no ability to harm our
economy through disruption of our fuel supply) in terms of environment (far
less production of particulates and VOCs right where we breath, less pollution
over all, less CO2 global warming gasses) in terms of piece of mind (less
noise) the plug-in series hybrid is the next best thing. Yet it is only a step
towards a day when long range EVs will be commonplace. Plug-in series hybrids
are a good thing for the future of EVs.
Sincerely, Joseph Lado
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So where do you buy No-Ox-Id A-Special?
Bruce
_____________________________________
Brian M. Sutin wrote:
> I slather the No-Ox-Id A-Special all over all
> my connections before I make them.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks, Lee. Great advice as usual, including a tidbit that sparks my
interest: You put in disconnects between 36v segments? What kind of
disconnects? Where could I get some and do you have some advice on putting
them in?
I'm already thinking about rewiring since I just put in two new (well, to
me, anyway) batteries with different posts (screw posts instead of lead
posts) and it wasn't easy to coax my existing wiring to handle it. I
managed but it's pretty obvious that in anticipation of getting a new pack I
need to start redesigning the battery box, the wiring, etc..
Matt
On 2/1/07, Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt Kenigson wrote:
> I've actually been apprehensive about cleaning my batteries because
> I don't know how to do it safely.
On my cars with floodeds, I clean them as follows.
1. Pull the fuses or disconnects, so they are isolated. My EVs have
broken them up into units of 36v or less, so there's no shock hazard.
2. Put some detergent and baking soda in water, and use this to scrub
the tops with a plastic scrub brush. Wear rubber gloves and old
clothes*.
3. Rinse 'em off with a garden hose, to get rid of the soap and crud.
4. Smear vaseline on the terminals. This helps reduce corrosion.
That's it! Usually needs to be done every 6 months or so (or more as the
batteries get older, because they gas and fizz more).
* Battery acid dissolves cotton. If you touch an acid-wetted battery
with your hands, it will have no effect on your hands. But if you wipe
them on your cotton jeans or shirt, you'll discover little holes in them
the next time you wash them!
--
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'm guessing the guy who built the vehicle (back in the early 90s per Ken
Koch) built the battery box out of wood to save on expense and out of
convenience and he probably put the separators in to reduce the chance of
thermal issues. That's only a guess, though, as I'm the fourth owner of the
truck. Looks like I'll be redesigning the battery box soon. Maybe I'll
even be able to put it under the bed!
Thanks for the suggestion on cleaning the posts. I'm planning on putting
that to use tomorrow morning! :)
Matt
On 2/1/07, Tim Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm curious.... why all the plywood seperators? 2 reasons I could think of
for NOT using them are
1. wood and acid do not play well together.
2. wood becomes another source of fuel should a fire actually occur.
I don't think you need seperators between the batteries.
Also regarding your cleaning of posts.... after cleaning coat them with
axle grease or vaseline, this will greatly increase the interval between
cleanings. Some may suggest using Noalox which is a name brand for a
substance used for NO ALuminum OXide. Since there shouldn't be any aluminum
in your lead terminals it would for you just be an expensive form of
vaseline or axle grease.
--
Stay Charged!
Hump
I-5, Blossvale NY
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Matt Kenigson
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: my battery fire
>
>>
>> If you using 6 volt batteries, then that is 120 volts or 150 charge
>> voltage
>> between these batteries. If its 12 volt batteries, then its 240 volts
> or
>> 300 charger volts!!
>>
>> Also between 19 and 2, 18 and 3 and etc will have a high voltage
between
>> the
>> batteries.
>>
>> In a battery circuit loop system like this, it is best to have a
> insulator
>> between these two rolls of batteries or try to have a gap between them.
>
>
> I have 6 volt batteries and they have a piece of 1/4" plywood between
> them.
> They are laid out like this: (best viewed in courier or some other
> mono-spaced font)
>
> -----------------------
> || 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1-||
> ---------------------
> || 6 |17 |18 |19 |20+||
> -----------------------
> ||7 |16|15|14|13||
> || | | x| | ||
> ------------------
> ||8 |9 |10|11|12||
> || | | | | ||
> ------------------
>
> Where all of the ---- and || segments are plywood. Battery #15 is my
> melted
> post battery, thus the x. So I guess that means I have 120V between
> batteries 1&20, 2&19, 3&18, and 4&17. I guess the worst might be
battery
> #s
> 6&17 and 7&16, since they should have 11x6=66v and 9x6=54v between them,
> respectively, without any separator. Am I understanding this correctly?
> Or
> is it 1 inclusive, so it would be 72v and 60v between them. Either way,
> should I accelerate my plans to redo the battery box?
>
> I'll do the testing you mentioned to see how bad surface conductance is
> and
> clean them as soon as I figure out how to do it safely -- see other
> thread.
>
>
> Matt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 11:05 PM 2/02/07 -0600, Lee Hart wrote:
Good work! As I said, I was just going by anecdotal evidence -- I see
these propane- and CNG-powered vehicles being used indoors all over the
place. I assumed they were relatively safe, or there would be lawsuits and
regulations against them.
The way the above quotations are worded, it sounds like they *may* be a
problem under certain circumstances. I'd guess this would be sufficiently
poor ventilation, and sufficiently "broken" equipment.
G'day Lee, and All
I'm sure someone will jump in and correct me, but:
IIRC, Gas (not gasoline) powered vehicles burn up the O2 in the environment
where they are, and produce mostly CO2 and some H2O and some relatively
non-toxic (to humans) other stuff. AFAIK they don't produce CO, which would
build up in the bodies of people in the space where the engines are
running, causing CO poisoning. Aeons ago when I was at school I had a
seasonal part-time job in a factory where an LPG powered forklift was in
operation. It stank, and if they were using it inside a lot we (the people
working there) would get nauseous, but as soon as we had fresh air we were
fine. And now any time I get a whif of LPG fumes I think of splitting scallops.
So from what I understand, running an infernal combustion engine on gas is
no better for the environment overall, it just makes the local environment
less toxic to humans, and visually cleaner (look how much better it is, you
can see the difference. Too bad what you are seeing will be a desert in 50
years...maybe).
OTOH, diesel is probably overall less damaging to the overall enviroment
for the distance travelled, or at least has the capability to be. The
particulates can be cycloned out - the inventer of the cyclone vacuum
cleaner made a cyclone to clean virtually all the soot from diesel exhaust
- then found that the soot was considered a hazardous material that he had
a lot of trouble disposing of, since it is so hazardous to humans!
I'll admit to being a sceptic over global warming, but feel that we must
try and reduce the impact we as humanity are having on the planet since it
is the only one we've got.
Regards
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
