EV Digest 6431
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) At what cd (drag coef) and roof size for a van would the drag of the
vehicle be less than the electricity generating rate of pv's on the roof?
by GWMobile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: Solectria Force NiMH Conversion - and fans/blowers
by "Noel P. Luneau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Battery charger recommendation
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4) Re: EV digest 6430
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5) Re: EV digest 6430
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6) RE: Battery charger recommendation
by "David Hrivnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: EV digest 6430
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8) RE: Battery charger recommendation
by "David Hrivnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Exide Orbitals anyone?
by "Mark Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: EV digest 6430
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Re: NiMH Batteries (was Re: Introductions)
by Mark Freidberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: EV digest 6430
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
13) Re: EV digest 6429
by Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: EV digest 6430
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: EV digest 6430
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: NiMH Batteries (was Re: Introductions)
by Ian Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: EV digest 6430
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Vehicle aerodynamics
by Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: EV digest 6427
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Let's have some fun.
At what cd (drag coef) and roof size for a van would the drag of the
vehicle be less than the electricity generating rate of pv's on the
roof?
In other words how long and aerodynamic would an van have to be before
it could crusie at say 70 mph endlessly on pv's on its roof in normal
unclouded daylight in say southern california latitude?
What is the cd of say a voyager van or another slick van?
How much would it have to be stretched to get enough roof for enough
photovoltaics (non titling so assume 30 degree sun angle.) To run all
day on a highway under the sun.
We can assume 10% pv efficiency right? Someone else here will know how
many watts it would take a typical van to run at 65 mph.
How efficient is the motor?
Let 's assume it is running in no battery mode so it's pv straight to
motor and there is no battery conversion loss.
www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily images about hurricanes, globalwarming
and the melting poles.
www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake images.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rod,
Thank you for the offer. For now I do not have detailed specs as I'm
waiting to visit a Force NiMH owner. However from the pictures that I
have of the front two blowers, the dimensions seem to be around 8"
square by about 3" thick, with a rectangle exhaust port. Not sure yet
if DC or AC.
Pictures to follow.
Thanks,
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rod Hower
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 3:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Solectria Force NiMH Conversion - and fans/blowers
> 7. Find similar air handlers to what Solectria used
> to cool the Ovonics.
Noel,
Will these be blowers or fans? What voltage
do you target using on these devices?
I frequently 'dumpster dive' at work and have lots of
12V and 24Vdc blowers hanging around in the basement.
I'm not looking to get money for them, but I would
like to get $10 for shipping (I like to promote EV's
and recycle!).
You can check out the air performance here,
http://www.ametektip.com/ametek/PDF/CatalogsHTML/BLDCCatalog2006/index.p
hp?page=0046
Some of the blowers with built in controls have a
0-4Vdc speed command, so you could command the
performance that you want up to the maximum air
performance.
Rod
--- "Noel P. Luneau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Well for Valentines Day, I cleaned out all the crap
> in the garage and
> moved the Force in.
>
> Yesterday was the start of the NiMH conversion. I
> removed all the
> batteries and did a fit test for the Ovonics.
> Interestingly enough, I
> was able to fit the standard six comfortably in the
> front and ten in the
> rear.
>
> I posted some pictures of the project in the Photo's
> section of the
> Solectria Yahoo group.
>
> So much more to do. Here is a rough draft of my
> Project plan. Feel
> free to offer advice.
>
> 1. Charge and load test the 32 batteries to
> determine the best 18.
> 2. Send two of those to Paul :)
> 3. Determine if 16 batteries will be within
> tolerance of the DC/DC
> Converter (200V Max), and AMC325 Motor Controller
> (200V Max) and if the
> 3KW NLG412 Brusa charger will not be under capacity.
> 4. Find and program the NLG412 with the correct
> charging profile for 15
> or 16 Ovonic batteries.
> 5. Program the AM325 Motor Controller for the change
> in Voltage and
> Amperage.
> 6. Find a packing material that will be able to
> withstand the heat that
> the NiMH will produce. I am not sure if the
> existing orange foam will
> suffice.
> 7. Find similar air handlers to what Solectria used
> to cool the Ovonics.
> 8. Attach the Blowers to the lid of the Battery
> boxes and provide
> ducting to the battery box exit holes.
> 9. Cut the battery boxes to provide exhaust for the
> air handlers.
> 10. Determine how to activate the blowers during
> charge and when heated.
> My Force has a circuit to activate the warming
> blanket during charge so
> maybe that can be used.
> 11. Determine if a BMS is required and if so how to
> implement.
> 12. Connect the batteries together.
> 13. Test drive.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Noel Luneau
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I run 2 Delta-Qs on my Tropica. Both are 72v and run in parallel if one
quits (which has not been a problem) all batteries still get charged.
They've got a prettly slick way of determining if there are multiple
chargers running so all run during the bulk phase but only one finishes
them off. The 2 give me 25 amps into the batteries from a universal
input.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: Battery charger recommendation
A smart charger will repay you many times over in longer service life
for
the battery. However, with no intent to deprecate the charger's
creator
(for whom I have a world of respect), a PFC charger doesn't really fall
into
the "smart" category. Its charge control is fairly simple. Adding
individual battery regulators brings the charge control about up to the
level of a $50 Cliplight (NAPA) 12 volt charger.
Also, the PFC is a non-isolated charger, meaning a higher risk of
electrical
shock or electrocution. The amount by which this risk is higher,
whether
slightly or significantly, is of some controversy. I don't want to get
into
a discussion of it, so I'll leave it at that. I will mention that it
is
VERY important to connect the charger input to a GFI, which is NOT
included
in your purchase of the charger.
If I'm not mistaken, The PFC also not approved by UL or any other
regulating
or testing authority, which may or may not matter to you.
I hate to break it to you, but for a capable EV charger, $1700 is
CHEAP.
The PFC is cheap because of the limitations listed above. One thing it
has
in spades, though, is raw power. It will charge very quickly, and for
many
people on this list, that and the price have been the primary factors
in the
purchase decision. The PFC is a popular charger.
At the other end of the spectrum, the Mercedes of chargers is the Brusa
range offered by Metric Mind. Someone once remarked that the insides
look
like they were designed by a Borg. ;-) They are not cheap; but see
above for
comments on the value of high quality, sophisticated chargers.
Another smart charger alternative, and isolated for safety, might be
the
Delta-Q chargers sold by Canev.com. They max out at 72 volts, IIRC, so
they're just about ideal for your application. They're not as powerful
as
the PFC, so depending on your needs, you might want two 36 volt models
instead of one 72 volt.
Have you looked at the other PFC chargers, by Russco? They're also not
isolated, and I think the charge control is about on the same level as
the
PFC, but they do include a built in GFI for safety.
A final inexpensive alternative would be to use two 36 volt or three 24
volt
smart chargers. There are several brands, many quite sophisticated in
charge control, usually UL approved, and isolated for safety (since
they're
a consumer product with a substantial market). These can be
relatively
cost effective, because they're produced in quantity for the wheelchair
and
golf car markets.
When using multiple chargers it's important to monitor them closely to
make
sure that all of them are working. If one fails without your
knowledge, you
can end up destroying the uncharged or undercharged modules in your
battery
pack.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK, this information helps. Thanks. So, the narrower the width of the
vehicle, the better the aerodynamics, so 6' wide vehicle does better
than a 9' wide vehicle. Does this mean that the overall length of the
vehicle isn't as important? Should I be looking for something skinny
and long rather than wide and short?
So, as I asked at least once before: would it be better to get a
small car and pull a travel trailer behind it? Once person said he
thought it might work better from an aerodynamic standpoint but he
hadn't done it himself so didn't know for sure.
I've already established that Lithium batteries are a no-go until
they are more affordable. I can't afford their cost.
On Feb 16, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
No they don't have to be, you just get more range for your money in
small
cars. Large vehicles run into the problem of diminishing returns.
Keeping it simple, there is a lot of stuff, commonly called losses,
that
consumes energy in a vehicle.
To keep things simple you can assume that the electrical components
(motor, controller, etc.) and transmission will use up 25% of the
energy
coming from the batteries.
The other 75% is used to overcome friction; rolling resistance and
aerodynamic drag.
If you double the frontal area (how big it looks from the front) of a
vehcile you double the aerodynamic drag.
The dodge sprinter has about twice the frontal area of a small car.
If you double the weight, you double the rolling resistance.
If you do both, then it can easily take 3 times as much energy to
go down
the road at 55 mph. At a guess this is what you can expect with the
Sprinter, about 1/3 the range per pound of batteries compared to a
small
car.
So a thousand pounds of batteries will take you three times as far
in a
small car as they will in a large truck.
Adding another 1,000 pounds of batteries increases your weight and
increases the amount of energy needed to go 55 mph, so doubling your
battery weight usually will give you less than double the range.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My options at this point are looking scary; only one day on this list
and I'm already starting to lose my spark. Not sure what I'll do at
this point – bicycle transportation and tent shelter anyone?
On Feb 16, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
I need to be as economical as humanly possible given the parameters I
need to achieve, so any details about how much all this will cost
(except the solar, as I've already found the info I need about that)
and where to get the best deal on the electric conversion parts would
be most appreciated.
For something like this, it's better to decide how much you can
afford and
then figure out what you can do for the money, than the other way
around.
I mean it doesn't do any good to spec out a system that will cost
$120,000-$150,000 if you can't possibly afford more than $30,000.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thank you Jody and I hope you are wrong in this situation. There have
been some dyno tests with a 10,000lb delivery truck, think UPS, and with
350 amp controller and 48V they achieved 26% improvement in MPG. I
would be happy with 20% and I have nearly twice the voltage, 30% more
current and a vehicle that is half the weight. So I am hoping it is
possible. Remember in this set up I do not need the DC motor to supply
all the power.
I played around with putting a motor beside the driveshaft but there
seems to be two problems. The first is space. The 2004 Avalanche with
the 31 gal gas tank does not have much extra space or clearance. The
second in one test vehicle the side load ended prematurely wearing out
the rear bearing and seal on the transmission causing an early rebuild.
I am hoping I can get Jim Husted to build a double 6.7" motor, one that
would be comparable to a WARP 9 motor.
Thank you
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 8:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Battery charger recommendation
David,
In the truck you are planning on installing that you are going
to have serious problems at 72V. I don't think you will be able to get
enough speed to drive around town at that voltage with that much weight.
Most 1500 series trucks weigh around 4000 lbs (my 68 weighs 3970 and my
95 3/4 ton 2wd weighs 5850). At that weight plus the weight of all the
controller, batteries, and motor you would be adding close to another
1000 pounds. Believe me, I think your idea is a good one, but without
more voltage I think you would be very dissappointed in your outcome.
Also, since you are planning on putting it in between the transmission
and the carrier bearing I think you will have problems with heavy
current draw at low speeds. You might want to consider putting the
motor to the side of the small driveshaft and connecting the motor to it
with a chain. That way you can adjust the ratio of the electric motor
to the driveshaft for best all around acceleration and top speed. I
believe for a vehicle that size you will have to use a Netgain 11 or 13
inch motor to go direct drive. Those motors are capable of huge amounts
of torque. They are pricey (my netgain 9 inch cost $1700) but well
worth it.
Jody
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Hrivnak
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 21:17
To: [email protected]
Subject: Battery charger recommendation
I was wondering if you could give me some advice on a good charger for
my hybrid conversion plan.
I am planning 2 strings of 6 12V AGM batteries for 72V total. The total
battery cost will run me about $1000
To charge them I am trying to decide among three options.
1) Schumacher SE-1072 - $200, this is basically a 10 amp dumb
charger and I would probably need to add a timer.
2) Zivan NG1 - $600 this seems to have some reasonable battery
management
3) Manzanita PFC-20 - $1700 This seems like a first class charger
but the price is high
As usual price does matter but I prefer not to ruin my batteries
prematurely. I am worried the lower cost Schumacher could cook the
batteries. Yet for the cost of Manzanita I could replace my battery
pack twice. I was hoping to find something that will last 3 years and
by then replace with newer lithium so the goal is not to last for the
longest possible time. Do you have any suggestions for me? I even
thought of 6 Soneil chargers but am not sure I can properly isolate the
batteries so I could charge at 12V but run the motor at 72V.
The batteries will be about 55 amphr so I am planning 110 amphrs at 72V.
I plan to charge them overnight, so a rapid charge is not important to
me.
Thank you in advance for any comments or advice.
PS the project I am planning is a hybrid not a pure EV. I have a full
size Chevrolet 1500 series truck. I plan on leaving the ICE engine and
then adding an electric motor in series with a shortened driveshaft. So
the electric does not have to fully power the vehicle. I am however
hoping the electric motor can provide peak power so around town the ICE
can more or less idle giving me a MPG boost. So while I will still use
gasoline I hope to use less of it. If the project does not work out
look for some great deals on EV parts on eBay.
David J. Hrivnak
www.hrivnak.com
Personal Account WWJD?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, I looked at some photos; they're cute. And it would be nice to
have something a bit bigger without sacrificing performance, but I'll
be lucky at this point if I can even do a conversion at all, given
the astronomical prices I'm reading on this list. I say again, it's
just wrong that you have to be a millionaire to afford even a modest
conversion away from fossil fuels. It's an abomination that given our
current state of technology that we don't already have the entire
planet phased out of ICE vehicles; by now we were supposed to be
living like the Jetsons, remember? ;-)
When I joined this list, I was excited about doing a conversion
because I'd been reading about many conversions that had been done
for as little as $1500 and as much as $8000 depending on parts and
extra stuff like solar; but nowhere did I ever come across anything
close to the numbers I'm getting here.
On Feb 16, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
The Ultravan is *taller* inside than the Sprinter, despite the
lower overall height. This is because it has no frame; it is a
monocoque, like an airplane or unibody car.
Yes, it is pretty wide. It's a motorhome, after all; meant to live
in more than to be driven. But did you look at a picture of one?
They are probably the most streamlined motorhome ever built, with a
Cd better than most cars.
Again, this is just a curiosity; not a realistic choice.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thank you Steve. Do you mind me asking what advantages did you see in
the Delta-Q over the Zivan chargers? Did you even compare the two?
Thank you
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 10:28 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Battery charger recommendation
I run 2 Delta-Qs on my Tropica. Both are 72v and run in parallel if one
quits (which has not been a problem) all batteries still get charged.
They've got a prettly slick way of determining if there are multiple
chargers running so all run during the bulk phase but only one finishes
them off. The 2 give me 25 amps into the batteries from a universal
input.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: Battery charger recommendation
A smart charger will repay you many times over in longer service life
for
the battery. However, with no intent to deprecate the charger's
creator
(for whom I have a world of respect), a PFC charger doesn't really fall
into
the "smart" category. Its charge control is fairly simple. Adding
individual battery regulators brings the charge control about up to the
level of a $50 Cliplight (NAPA) 12 volt charger.
Also, the PFC is a non-isolated charger, meaning a higher risk of
electrical
shock or electrocution. The amount by which this risk is higher,
whether
slightly or significantly, is of some controversy. I don't want to get
into
a discussion of it, so I'll leave it at that. I will mention that it
is
VERY important to connect the charger input to a GFI, which is NOT
included
in your purchase of the charger.
If I'm not mistaken, The PFC also not approved by UL or any other
regulating
or testing authority, which may or may not matter to you.
I hate to break it to you, but for a capable EV charger, $1700 is
CHEAP.
The PFC is cheap because of the limitations listed above. One thing it
has
in spades, though, is raw power. It will charge very quickly, and for
many
people on this list, that and the price have been the primary factors
in the
purchase decision. The PFC is a popular charger.
At the other end of the spectrum, the Mercedes of chargers is the Brusa
range offered by Metric Mind. Someone once remarked that the insides
look
like they were designed by a Borg. ;-) They are not cheap; but see
above for
comments on the value of high quality, sophisticated chargers.
Another smart charger alternative, and isolated for safety, might be
the
Delta-Q chargers sold by Canev.com. They max out at 72 volts, IIRC, so
they're just about ideal for your application. They're not as powerful
as
the PFC, so depending on your needs, you might want two 36 volt models
instead of one 72 volt.
Have you looked at the other PFC chargers, by Russco? They're also not
isolated, and I think the charge control is about on the same level as
the
PFC, but they do include a built in GFI for safety.
A final inexpensive alternative would be to use two 36 volt or three 24
volt
smart chargers. There are several brands, many quite sophisticated in
charge control, usually UL approved, and isolated for safety (since
they're
a consumer product with a substantial market). These can be
relatively
cost effective, because they're produced in quantity for the wheelchair
and
golf car markets.
When using multiple chargers it's important to monitor them closely to
make
sure that all of them are working. If one fails without your
knowledge, you
can end up destroying the uncharged or undercharged modules in your
battery
pack.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It depends on which type you were looking at. Some of them are pretty
pricey.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Poulsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: Exide Orbitals anyone?
Last I checked the Orbital prices (which was a while ago), they were $98
each.
Mark Ward wrote:
I can get Exide Orbitals wholesale ($100 ea. approx)through where I work.
Has anyone had experience good or bad with them?
I will be needing batts in the near future...hopefully!
Mark Ward
95 Saab 900SE "Saabrina"
www.saabrina.blogspot.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 2/16/2007 8:40:57 PM Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, the narrower the width of the
vehicle, the better the aerodynamics, so 6' wide vehicle does better
than a 9' wide vehicle. >>>>
Generally.... however there's a lot more to it than width of the vehicle. A
three-plus foot wide motorcycle, with rider, will get WORSE mileage than a
well designed six foot wide car. Why? The motorcycle and rider is vastly
more aerodynamically "dirty" than the slick-to-the-air car. The SHAPE of what
you're pushing through the air really counts. But, all else being equal, the
skinnier the better.
Matt Parkhouse
Colorado Springs, CO
BMW m/c-Golf Cart trike - 48 volts, 30mph on the flat, 35 mile range
1972 VW Van - to be converted this year!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why can't the EAA hire some fundraiser(s), rake in the
cash, initialize an EV-size NIMH production facility,
and sell to members at an affordable price? How hard
can it be?
Mark
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Hooper wrote:
> > Interesting about the Cobasys/Chevron
> relationship, why am I not
> > surprised!?
> >
> > There are a few Chinese manufacturers of large
> capacity NiMHs, e.g
> > http://nthaiyang.en.alibaba.com/. They are pretty
> expensive though, I
> > got quoted US$153ea for 1.2V, 80Ah (600A peak
> discharge) cells, so it's
> > heading towards $20K for a ~10kWh pack! Ouch.
> >
> > The option I'm currently looking at are Sub-Cs,
> due to their high
> > discharge rate (>10C). Manufacturer direct,
> they're about US$1.50 each
> > for 1.2v 3.5Ah, I'll need about 2500 of them for
> 10kWh. So twice the
> > price of the best lead acid, but half the weight
> and hopefully longer
> > cycle life. Using that many individual cells seems
> silly, but it has
> > been done before, e.g the Tesla Roadster, or White
> Lightning
>
> Lots of people are trying to use hundreds to
> thousands of small cells
> to make an EV sized battery pack. There are lots of
> problems! Frankly,
> I'm pessimistic -- NO ONE has any long-term
> experience yet. I think it
> works in the short term, but will prove impractical
> in the long run (too
> expensive, too unreliable). But, time will tell!
> --
> 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
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I joined this list, I was excited about doing a conversion
because I'd been reading about many conversions that had been done
for as little as $1500 and as much as $8000 depending on parts and
extra stuff like solar; but nowhere did I ever come across anything
close to the numbers I'm getting here.
It was a shock to me too, Crystal..... Those low figures no doubt are done
with surplus aircraft motors and the like. I spent about $1600 on my project
and that's not counting the motorcycle parts (they were part of the "basement
stash" of old BMW parts). I'm planning on $6,000+ for the VW Van project
(DC powered, 50 mile range, no solar panels (on the vehicle at least).
You can take a look at what $1600 got me......
_http://new.photos.yahoo.com/hobo5743bmw/album/576460762322330302
Matt Parkhouse
Colorado Springs, CO
BMW m/c-Golf Cart trike - 48 volts, 30mph on the flat, 35 mile range
1972 VW Van - to be converted this year!
_ (http://new.photos.yahoo.com/hobo5743bmw/album/576460762322330302)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
25 deg Celsius? That's about 77 deg Fahrenheit - nowhere near freezing!
Nick
Cor van de Water wrote:
Crystal,
Let's just look at the specs of the solar panel manufacturers:
All solar panels are spec'ed at 25 deg Celcius (cell temp!) while receiving
1000W per square meter irradiation.
That means that they need to blow almost freezing temp air over the panels
to keep them at spec'ed parameters.
They do that, because output voltage drops with higher temps, so the colder,
the more power.
From freezing ambient to a hot summer day can drop 20% of voltage, so you
should count on 80% output on a hot sunny wind-still summer day, unless
panels are tilted and the hot air underneath can escape by convection.
Cor.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 5:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV digest 6429
That sounds like a cool idea. If I could engineer it properly, the extra
panels could slide out when I'm parked and then slide back in while in
motion.
Exactly how "cold" are we talking for the sunny-day charging? I grew up in
Iowa, so cold to me is very different than cold to someone who grew up in
California.
On Feb 16, 2007, at 6:55 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: Robert Lemke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: February 16, 2007 11:21:50 AM CST
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: First post
If you go the AC route and higher voltage, then you will need 28 X
12 volt for 336 volts. I think using solar would keep you from ever
being stranded. Nice thing about the higher voltage is that it keeps
wire diameter down to a nice small size from the panels.
Check the dimensions of a 10 watt solar panel and multiply by 28
panels. AC inverter/controllers have a built in DC-DC converter for
your 12 volt loads so will not need seperate panels for that voltage.
If you can fit (28) 30 watt panels then with 9 hours exposure would
generate 7500 watts and would recharge in about 4 days. Solar panels
preduce the most power on sunny COLD days. With this in mind, I would
build a rack for your roof that would allow air to pass under the
panels. This would allow you to increase the amount of panels by 50 %
allowing for a little side to side overhang (about 5" each side) and
at the end of the van give you a nice little 4 to 6 foot sun awning.
Bob
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> OK, this information helps. Thanks. So, the narrower the width of the
> vehicle, the better the aerodynamics, so 6' wide vehicle does better
> than a 9' wide vehicle. Does this mean that the overall length of the
> vehicle isn't as important? Should I be looking for something skinny
> and long rather than wide and short?
Aerodynamically speaking long and skinny has less drag than short and fat.
The length does effect the overall drag, but not as much as width does
(for a given volume)
> So, as I asked at least once before: would it be better to get a
> small car and pull a travel trailer behind it? Once person said he
> thought it might work better from an aerodynamic standpoint but he
> hadn't done it himself so didn't know for sure.
Nope. You'd have a problem getting enough batteries into a small car to
make it capable of towing the trailer any distance. Plus the trailer is
going to be just about as wide and tall as the van, which means the
trailer will have about the same aerodynamic drag as the van. So you'd end
up with MORE drag (two vehicles, plus extra axles and wheels)
>
> I've already established that Lithium batteries are a no-go until
> they are more affordable. I can't afford their cost.
I beginning to think your best bet is to use biodeisel in the Sprinter for
a few years until the prices on LiPol drops and/or your cash flow
improves.
Buy a small trailer and load it up with 55 gallon drums so you can fill up
where you can find 100% biodiesel and then just drive untill you can find
more.
Most states have at least one place where you can buy 100% biodiesel. The
sprinter can run on this without modification as long as it's not too
cold. Biodiesel gels at a higher temperature than petrol diesel, but it's
usually somewhere below 40 degrees.
> On Feb 16, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
>
>> No they don't have to be, you just get more range for your money in
>> small
>> cars. Large vehicles run into the problem of diminishing returns.
>> Keeping it simple, there is a lot of stuff, commonly called losses,
>> that
>> consumes energy in a vehicle.
>> To keep things simple you can assume that the electrical components
>> (motor, controller, etc.) and transmission will use up 25% of the
>> energy
>> coming from the batteries.
>> The other 75% is used to overcome friction; rolling resistance and
>> aerodynamic drag.
>> If you double the frontal area (how big it looks from the front) of a
>> vehcile you double the aerodynamic drag.
>> The dodge sprinter has about twice the frontal area of a small car.
>>
>> If you double the weight, you double the rolling resistance.
>>
>> If you do both, then it can easily take 3 times as much energy to
>> go down
>> the road at 55 mph. At a guess this is what you can expect with the
>> Sprinter, about 1/3 the range per pound of batteries compared to a
>> small
>> car.
>>
>> So a thousand pounds of batteries will take you three times as far
>> in a
>> small car as they will in a large truck.
>> Adding another 1,000 pounds of batteries increases your weight and
>> increases the amount of energy needed to go 55 mph, so doubling your
>> battery weight usually will give you less than double the range.
>
>
--
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 ---
<grin> it's been done. Search for Steve Roberts, the high tech nomad and
his recumbent bicycle "Behemoth". He road around the states a couple
decades back on a it towing a trailer with satelite comms, solar panels,
ham radio. The bike had it's own local area network.
He wrote articals for different magazines. Originally he uploaded them
using acustic modems, before he got the satellite uplink.
> My options at this point are looking scary; only one day on this list
> and I'm already starting to lose my spark. Not sure what I'll do at
> this point bicycle transportation and tent shelter anyone?
>
> On Feb 16, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
>
>>
>>> I need to be as economical as humanly possible given the parameters I
>>> need to achieve, so any details about how much all this will cost
>>> (except the solar, as I've already found the info I need about that)
>>> and where to get the best deal on the electric conversion parts would
>>> be most appreciated.
>>
>> For something like this, it's better to decide how much you can
>> afford and
>> then figure out what you can do for the money, than the other way
>> around.
>>
>> I mean it doesn't do any good to spec out a system that will cost
>> $120,000-$150,000 if you can't possibly afford more than $30,000.
>>
>
>
--
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 ---
Well I'm willing to be a guinea pig and give this few-thousand-NiMHs
idea a go! Hopefully in a couple of years I'll be in a position to
say whether or not it was a good idea.. ;)
Basically I think the main problem is the whole "lowest common
denominator" idea, i.e the pack is only as good as the weakest cell.
You can only charge the pack until the first cell peaks, the
likelihood of premature failure increases in proportion to the number
of cells, etc..
On 17/02/2007, at 2:56 AM, Lee Hart wrote:
Lots of people are trying to use hundreds to thousands of small cells
to make an EV sized battery pack. There are lots of problems!
Frankly, I'm pessimistic -- NO ONE has any long-term experience
yet. I think it works in the short term, but will prove impractical
in the long run (too expensive, too unreliable). But, time will tell!
--
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 ---
$8,000 is about what it takes to build a conversion out of a small car
that has 30-50 miles of range...if you are thrifty and lucky.
$1500 can be done using surplus parts and used batteries...maybe.
Right now a new set of GC batteries (~1200 lbs) costs about $1,500.
Again, these prices are for small cars with fairly limited range. You
want a LARGE vehicle with relatively LONG range. That aint cheap.
Rule of thumb, it takes about 800 lbs of lead-acid batteries to get the
same range as 1 gallon of diesel.
So if you convert a VW rabbit that gets 40 mpg of diesel, then 800 lbs of
batteries get's you ~40 miles range.
If you convert a van that get's 12 mpg, then you get 12 miles of range for
the same 800 lbs.
> Yes, I looked at some photos; they're cute. And it would be nice to
> have something a bit bigger without sacrificing performance, but I'll
> be lucky at this point if I can even do a conversion at all, given
> the astronomical prices I'm reading on this list. I say again, it's
> just wrong that you have to be a millionaire to afford even a modest
> conversion away from fossil fuels. It's an abomination that given our
> current state of technology that we don't already have the entire
> planet phased out of ICE vehicles; by now we were supposed to be
> living like the Jetsons, remember? ;-)
>
> When I joined this list, I was excited about doing a conversion
> because I'd been reading about many conversions that had been done
> for as little as $1500 and as much as $8000 depending on parts and
> extra stuff like solar; but nowhere did I ever come across anything
> close to the numbers I'm getting here.
>
>
> On Feb 16, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
>
>> The Ultravan is *taller* inside than the Sprinter, despite the
>> lower overall height. This is because it has no frame; it is a
>> monocoque, like an airplane or unibody car.
>>
>> Yes, it is pretty wide. It's a motorhome, after all; meant to live
>> in more than to be driven. But did you look at a picture of one?
>> They are probably the most streamlined motorhome ever built, with a
>> Cd better than most cars.
>>
>> Again, this is just a curiosity; not a realistic choice.
>
>
--
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 ---
Disclaimer: I am not (yet!) an aeronautical engineer and haven't
studied this subject in detail. This is a common-sense discussion
littered with examples instead of the math I don't yet know.
On Feb 16, 2007, at 8:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the narrower the width of the vehicle, the better the
aerodynamics, so 6' wide vehicle does better than a 9' wide vehicle.
Not necessarily.
The important measurement is not just the width, it's the total frontal
area - the number of square feet taken up by the outline of the car as
you look at it from the front. As a crude approximation you can
multiply the height by the width of the vehicle. A low wide vehicle
might have the same frontal area as a high skinny vehicle. (Of course
with a high skinny vehicle you'll need to worry more about stability -
tipping over in corners and being blown around by side winds.)
Does this mean that the overall length of the vehicle isn't as
important? Should I be looking for something skinny and long rather
than wide and short?
The length of the vehicle doesn't greatly affect the drag, unless the
extra length consists of a lot of rough air-disturbing shapes (which
increases drag). A smooth-sided long vehicle has the same frontal area
as a shorter vehicle. This is nice, because you can get more cargo
capacity with little increase in drag. Hence smooth-sided, long semi
trucks.
In general, longer tapered shapes have less drag (again, assuming equal
frontal area). This is because the vehicle "parts" the air with its
front, and the air has to flow back together behind it. If the vehicle
is long, the air has more time to gently flow back together.
But more important than the length is the shape of the front and rear.
The best shape for the front is a blunt rounded shape (like half of a
sphere), and the best shape for the rear is a long tapered shape. This
is the classic "teardrop" shape that is assumed by a raindrop falling
through the air.
Or, think of the shape of an airplane body. Or (aha!) the shape of the
UltraVan.
Notice how the back of a semi truck is not tapered at all! They're
sacrificing aerodynamics for increased cargo capacity. That will
change when fuel gets expensive enough that it's worth losing the cargo
space. Also notice how the front of semi trucks have been getting
smoother and rounder over time, which doesn't hurt cargo space.
So, as I asked at least once before: would it be better to get a small
car and pull a travel trailer behind it? Once person said he thought
it might work better from an aerodynamic standpoint but he hadn't done
it himself so didn't know for sure.
Probably not.
Anything that disturbs the air increases drag - the more violent the
disturbance, the greater the drag. If you look at the side silhouette
of a car towing a trailer, you see that the air has to go up over the
car, down to the trailer hitch, then back up again over the trailer,
then down behind the trailer. This adds a whole lot of drag,
especially if the trailer is significantly larger than the towing
vehicle (which increases the frontal area). This is why it takes a lot
of horsepower to tow trailers.
Actually, if the trailer is close to the back of the towing vehicle,
and the trailer is smaller (so no increase in the frontal area), then
the drag might actually go down - because you've made a total shape
more like a teardrop.
Again, think of an airplane body. The sides and top are very smooth.
In fact, the cross-section is a circle - no corners, even.
One last point. The drag of a given shape increases with the square of
the velocity. The drag on a car traveling at 50 mph is four times as
much as the drag on the same car traveling at 25 mph. So you can
greatly reduce your drag by driving slower. This is why cars get
better mileage at low speeds.
To sum up, if you want low drag:
1) have a small frontal area
2) have a rounded front and a tapered rear
3) have a smooth-sided vehicle
4) travel slowly instead of quickly
As always, you'll have to make tradeoffs, like the semi truck builders.
If you want room to stand up, you'll increase the frontal area. Vans
aren't available with tapered rears, etc.
--
Doug Weathers
Las Cruces, NM, USA
http://www.gdunge.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not to mention the difficulty in finding one for sale. I mean they made
less than 400 of them and that was almost 40 years ago.
>
> The Ultravan is *taller* inside than the Sprinter, despite the lower
> overall height. This is because it has no frame; it is a monocoque, like
> an airplane or unibody car.
>
> Yes, it is pretty wide. It's a motorhome, after all; meant to live in more
> than to be driven. But did you look at a picture of one? They are probably
> the most streamlined motorhome ever built, with a Cd better than most
> cars.
>
> Again, this is just a curiosity; not a realistic choice.
> --
> Lee Hart
>
>
--
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 ---
