EV Digest 6464
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Optima batteries
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Saw Zen Car Today
by Mark Dutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) White Zombie history page
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Breaker mounting
by David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Re Zivan pf correction
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by "Randy Burleson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Regenerative suspension
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Slow charging
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: contactor controllers (was RE: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker
Shock)
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by John Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Controlling an alternator (without wrecking it)?
by "Darin - at - metrompg.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Optima batteries
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Optima batteries
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Optima batteries
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Controlling an alternator (without wrecking it)?
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Regenerative suspension
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Optima batteries
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Fixing Mark's S-10 EV RE: T-105 Sitcker Shock
by "Michaela Merz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> occassionally, the spirals will short out, causing the
> batteries to internally heat up and catch your vehicle on
> fire .... :-( Normally, this sometimes occurs under high
> amperage loads, but can happen under normal loads (50-150 amps).
This is a very interesting statement. Can you provide any examples
where this has happened?
I have heard that one of the original marketing demos for Optimas
involved showing how they continued to work after having been shot with
a firearm. The bullet passing though one of the spirally wound cells
should certainly result in shorting of the layers.
I know personally of an Optima returned to a marine store with a bullet
hole through it, but I don't think the bullet hole was the cause for
return, and it was not melted or otherwise burned up as would be
necessary before an internal short could catch anything external to the
battery on fire.
If an ordinary D34 Optima can be considered to hold 600Wh (12V * 50Ah),
then each cell stores only 100Wh. It seems unlikely that failure of a
single cell would really release a significant amount of energy...
I've got no connection to or vested interest in Optima, but I do have 10
of these batteries in my car so am certainly quite interested in
anything factual that can be provided about this.
Thanks,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Has GE 400A controller, ADC 6.7 motor and transfer case, regen, Dekka
Dominator Gels for 72V. The body is aluminum with a carbon fiber
floor pan. A nice little car if you beef up the performance, the
total weight with the batteries is 1200 lbs.
M
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey John
I see you've been just plugging away there with new
stuff being added. I came accross the shaft drawing
and was wondering where you got a hold of that? You
know it's been almost two years since I've seen the
drive end of the motor. I chuckled to myself "Wow, is
that a Dutchman shaft on that motor or is it just
really happy to have been Siaminized" when I saw that
fat daddy on the one pic LMAO!
I did want to add just one comment that it's getting
pretty big and at the shops connection it took quite
awhile for all the pics and stuff to load. Thought
I'd throw the idea of breaking it down by year for
those who may load slow. Anyway just something I
noticed even though I like the way you've formated it
cleanly. You got to admit that there's some history
there though, hell do you ever throw anything away 8^P
Anyway keep up the good work, you've inspired me to
get off my butt and upload some of the things I want
to get up at mine.
Have a great weekend all.
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
____________________________________________________________________________________
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
#10-32 is a 3/16" mean dia. 32 threads per inch screw. this screw is a UNF
screw thread (Unified fine thread series. The Next smaller, the #8, also
happens to have a 32 threads per inch pitch. the next smaller is the #6, which
again has 32 threads per inch. I forget if that is considered a fine or coarse
thread series for that size screw.
Go to www.mcmaster.com and search on 'screw' in their hardware section and you
can select screws by choosing any number of features, such as material, head
type, recess, and size/thread. Yes, one of the choices is "#6-32." It is a
genuine method of specifying both size and thread system and pitch. It is a
shorthand that has become common notation in the US.
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: Mick Abraham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:27:46 PM
Subject: RE: Breaker mounting
Eduardo Kaftanski said: "I bought a breaker from the surplus site. An Airpax
250A 160V. Problem is I cant find the right screw to fix it to the front
mounting holes... Tried 5mm and 9/16 and both are the right diameter but the
wrong pitch...
Web site says '# 6-32' but I cant find that around here... Any
other name for it so I can find it?
[Mick says:] I'll bet #6-32 is a misprint. I'm pretty sure I've used the
identical breaker for some of my solar electric control systems. I believe
the mounting screws are #10-32. That is 3/16" diameter (or close to 5mm),
whereas a #6 screw is less than 1/8" diameter (closer to 3mm). #10 screws
are available with a coarse thread (24 threads per inch) and a fine thread
(32 threads per inch). I think you need the fine thread #10-32. Perhaps the
supplier of that breaker would throw some in an envelope for you.
Mick Abraham
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: JS
> Lee, can you guestimate the inductance and capacitance needed?
> I have several large inductors and oil-filled capacitors left over
> from a theatre organ blower project. I assume the Zivan appears
> inductive. Before I break out my oscilloscope can you get me in
> the ball-park?
The input of the Zivan (and most other switchers) is capacitive, with a very
high crest factor. It draws all its current near the peak of each AC line
cycle. The current waveform has a very strong 3rd harmonic, so the simplest
filter is an LC network that passes 60hz and blocks 180hz (and above).
The capacitor goes straight across the AC line. The inductor goes in series
with either leg of the AC line to the Zivan. The optimum values for L and C
depend on the load. Since we don't have data on the Zivan's current waveform,
we can't calculate the best values. What I've done is grab whatever inductors I
can find, and then experiment with different capacitors until I get the best
results.
If your junk box isn't well equipped, you can use a circuit simulation program
to "play with" different values until you get a best fit to a sinewave. A good
approximation for the Zivan is a bridge rectifier, with a big capacitor and
resistor in parallel on the DC side.
--
Lee Hart
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> * anti-squat upon acceleration (swing-arm pushes the tail end up) and
> * squat upon deceleration (swing-arm pulls the tail end down)
> I think this is backwards for chain driven rear wheels, after all
> thats how we do wheelies.
It is counter-intuitive, but true. Wheelies are more about weight
transfer than squat/antisquat. Long ago, I two-wheeled almost
exclusively, but a combination of skills atrophy and California traffic
finally led me to retreat from two wheels. From long distant
recollection, IIRC, Keith Code well-explained the various rear-wheel
forces at work in "A Twist of the Wrist" book.
> > I guess that I need to white-board a vector diagram out, ...
> I have the URL of a calculator for all this at home I can post later.
Please post it -- I fear that I may be getting lost in the forest,
staring at tree roots.
> Perhaps I am just chicken little.
I'd rather read the concerns here, and consider them, than experience
them later on my own, as I slide along the pavement. Been there, and
done that... one of the other reasons I retired from two wheels.
> > > nor would I want to deal with the effect of adding unsprung
weight.
> > Definitely a concern, but negative effects should be reduced ... by
> > anchoring the motor close to the swingarm pivot.
> This I agree with ;>)
Whew, I'm not totally in the ozone. :p
> I'd very much like to hear your battery-motor-weight calcs, as
> I am penciling out various options now.
I'm not even to the point of penciling weights yet... though I'm more
than a few pages into a new design notebook. I'm currently rewiring the
dash on my hobby 4x4 to work with the SEFI Ford 302 I swapped into it.
If anyone is curious, there are some truly bandwidth-abusive ICE swap
pictures at: http://staff.4x4wire.com/randii/motor/
Some type of ultra-efficient vehicle is the next project. I started
thinking it would be based off an ICE economy car, but I believe that
the good folks on this list are to blame in ensuring that it will likely
be an Electric Vehicle.
Randii
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am trying to figure this out. Forgive me if I'm being dense here, but...
If you use a light spring, you'd get lots of travel. I can see that. What I
don't see is why it would not allow the wheel to move back into contact with
the street.
As I recall, some shocks (most?) have a valve in them that can vary the
resistance of the stroke, depending on the direction the shock is traveling.
I don't see why this system couldn't do the same. If the windings were
playing against a fixed magnet, you'd get more resistance as the shock
traveled quickly... but if the magnet was similar to an alternator, you
could vary the field. If returning the wheel downward quickly was the goal,
couldn't you simply eliminate (or reduce) the field voltage?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cor van de Water" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 11:36 PM
Subject: RE: Regenerative suspension
> What I see as a severe problem in "regenerative suspension" is that it
will
> not very well... regenerate.
>
> Oh sure, it will initially generate a burst of power when a bump is hit,
but
> if you try to tap that power to the max, this means that the spring must
be
> very weak. Now, your wheel will move *up* the bump, but not back, so you
> lose contact with the road after the bump and you may crash.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eduardo Kaftanski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 2:09 PM
Subject: Slow charging
> Is there a problem with 'slow charging' on floddies?
> I bought a 48volt/10amp charger made for lead acid floddies and plan
> on using it to charge my first pack (the one you all say it will
> be murdered :)
> Eduardo K.
I don't know what others will say, but I prefer using lower A chargers. I
find I can more closely guess the timer setting, so I can cut it off in the
90-100% charged range. I'd then follow up with a final charge (at least once
a month) of each batt individually.
But that was with a small batt set, four 12V 12A Hawkers in my toy(s). It's
the only way I was sure I wasn't going to fry my system. (Bad experience on
2 packs in my first EV.) When I used a higher A 48V charger and didn't use
the individual charge method, I don't think they did as well, either in life
or range... but that's obviously no proof. I found I was using more wall
juice using the smaller charger, but also went 5+ % further. Perhaps this
was because the latter charger(s) weren't quite as efficient or their
algorithm was different?
Unfortunately, I only had 2 12V chargers, so the balancing method was very
time consuming... and 100% manual.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I can certainly understand the concern, but my single experience with this
sort of vehicle was my Freeway.
The motor "fed" a counter-shaft, which drove the rear wheel. There were
several problems, mostly in that the counter-shaft wasn't quite on the pivot
point. With a chain, I could have used a tension cog to take up the slack,
but with Gates belts, it left me with a delicate problem of keeping the
tension "just right." Climbing the killer hill, torque would lift the rear
of the car, causing the belts to ratchet. I never made it up that hill.
Reverse the polarity and you had to use a velvet foot or the suspension
would "crash" to its upward position... with a scary crunch.
One of the probs in my car was that the counter-shaft ran the width of the
car. This required 3 bearings, which were hard to adjust properly If I were
to redo it, I'd keep that shaft, but make it a larger diameter and shorten
it to the minimum length, with the input and output cogs between the blocks.
I'd also try to find a way to bring it more inline with the pivot... which
was almost impossible in this particular design.
As mentioned, the alternative is much easier. Mount the motor near the
pivot, or perhaps on the opposite side of the pivot. (In the opposite, the
motor weight might offset the unsprung weight of the wheel and brake.) That
leaves you with a direct drive... and chain or belt tension would be
directly on the motor bearings, but mounting a pillar block bearing on the
end of the shaft should take up much of this additional tension. I think up
to 50% of my power was lost through the system I used. I reduced that loss
somewhat, but it still limited my range considerably... that and the huge
loss by using cogged belts.
----- Original Message -----
From: "john fisher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
> Several of the Chinese mini buggies use a swing-arm rear suspension like
an ATV, with concentric sprockets so that there
> is no change at all in chain tension. In fact big sand buggies often use
dual swing-arms set up like this. As for the
> squat characteristics, I wouldn't worry much in a three wheeler where
weight transfer is not so critical as a bike, but
> perhaps I misunderstood your design?
>
> I wouldn't want drivetrain parts vibrating with the suspension, nor would
I want to deal with the effect of adding
> unsprung weight. but thats just me.
>
> HTH
> John Fisher
>
> Randy Burleson wrote:
> >>
> > I'm sketching a setup for a 3-wheeler that seems a better compromise --
> > mount the motor to the swing-arm directly. Sprung weight has some
> > disadvantages, but if you mount the motor closer to the pivot, effective
> > leverage minimizes this impact. The more common alternative seems to be
> > mounting the motor unsprung and chain/belt-drive to the wheel, but if
> > you do that, suspension movement is applied directly to chain/belt slack
> > or the motor itself.
> >
> > Are there any obvious flaws to this that those who have gone before can
> > identify?
> >
> >
> > Randii
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've been thinking of giving this a try, I got in the new $64 kilovac
contactor, looks good, at that price you can use three or four of them,
and use the micro to turn them on/off. The question is how much noise
do they make, and how fast will they wear out using them this way?
It will definitely require having a battery balancing charger because
the lower voltage bats in the pack are going to drain a lot more than
the higher voltage bats.
Jack
Lee Hart wrote:
Just look at controllers, a contactor controller puts out more power
at 1/10th the cost, can be
very smooth, reliable, easily repairable in minutes beside the road
if necessary...
Randy Burleson wrote:
Tell me more about "very smooth" -- how so?
(really wanting to believe, but intuitively doubting)
"Very smooth" for a contactor controller means the steps are small
enough so you don't notice them; this typically requires 3 or more steps
if you have a transmission, 8 or more if it is transmissionsless.
Or, you can use a contactor controller with a sepex or shunt motor, and
control the field with a rheostat. This gives stepless control just like
a PWM controller.
Or, you can use a contactor controller with a continuously variable
transmission, with the transmission providing the smooth speed control.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Randy see interspersed comments.
Randy Burleson wrote:
* anti-squat upon acceleration (swing-arm pushes the tail end up) and
* squat upon deceleration (swing-arm pulls the tail end down)
I think this is backwards for chain driven rear wheels, after all
thats how we do wheelies.
It is counter-intuitive, .... Keith Code well-explained the various rear-wheel
forces at work in "A Twist of the Wrist" book.
Ahem.
I don't know Keith personally, but I do know lots of people who do, and
people who are physicists who do, and lets just say he's not a
scientific authority, even to people who like him. He has some good
pointers in the books, and the school is deemed worthwhile by people I
respect, though I'd go elsewhere.
But I am frequently befuddled so I'll look it up in Tony Foale's book. I
may have the definition reversed....
I guess that I need to white-board a vector diagram out, ...
I have the URL of a calculator for all this at home I can post later.
Please post it -- I fear that I may be getting lost in the forest,
staring at tree roots.
http://www.tonyfoale.com/ has his book and his software. Said to be
very helpful over on the mc chassis list. The book is very good.
I'd rather read the concerns here, and consider them, than experience
them later on my own, as I slide along the pavement. Been there, and
done that...
me too just last weekend. but on some hard dirt. Getting old and slow
sux except for the alternative. ;>)
Whew, I'm not totally in the ozone. :p
Who knows? I am having fun. Maybe we'll each have something built one day.
I'm not even to the point of penciling weights yet... though I'm more
than a few pages into a new design notebook. ...
Some type of ultra-efficient vehicle is the next project.
maybe we should compare notes off list. I am planning a fairly extensive
web site with details on the various options, EV and otherwise. I just
re-joined this list, but saw a post that someone has a lot of experience
with 3 wheelers and ultralights. Anybody out there?
John Fisher
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roland Wiench wrote:
If you have a two wire control alternator that has two wires in the small
plastic plug, One wire ( the small one comes from the ignition circuit that
provides 12 volt this R wire or to the regulator. There is a larger red
wire in this plastic plug that is connected directly to battery B+. All
you have to do is to switch off the R wire to stop the alternator generated
output.
Thanks for that info. There is also a third wire, which would go to the
idiot light (which I can probably ignore).
I use a deep cycle battery for my 12 volt accessory battery, so I can
discharge it more deeply than a standard battery.
I'll likely do the same thing.
Cor van de Water wrote:
> I have the idea that Darin asked about the possibility to regen
> into his pack, instead of into the 12V battery.
Actually, I was thinking about "baby steps", and would probably attempt
regen to the 12v accessory battery as an introductory project before
diving in to mod the guts of the alternator for traction pack regen.
That said, thanks for the info on how to do that mod.
At this point, regen of any type is fairly far down the "to do" list.
We're just at the battery rack fabrication stage.
Where I live is fairly flat and traffic is sparse enough that I suspect
I'd maximize range more through anticipatory coasting than by powering
up to stops and jumping on the regen via the brake pedal for the last
few car lengths. Still, there will undoubtedly be times when I'll wish
I had it.
Glad to know both the 12v and pack voltage approaches are doable.
Thanks for the ideas & feedback, everyone.
Darin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The Optima is a good choice for very high peak power delivery (such as
> sports cars or drag racing). But, they are relatively expensive and have
> a low cycle life -- that makes their cost per mile very high.
What causes the low cycle life? Is it just their general design, or the lack
of protection during charging? Or perhaps extreme abuse (such as in drag
racing)? Or... in worse case... that the batts simply don't stand up?
As you noted, my draw will be heavy from a small pack. Think electrathon...
sort of. <g> Per the specs I've gathered, this rig uses a very light pack in
order to make a light vehicle work at speed. I truly doubt it will meet the
specs claimed, thus I'm thinking of increasing voltage by 50% and
range/speed accordingly. With such a light vehicle, pack weight is a real
consideration. I know this designer and he overbuilds very little... so I'll
be consulting his talent to make sure my batt choice will fit and won't
overstress everything else.
> Wow; that's a very light vehicle. 72v worth of Optimas is 270 lbs,
> giving you a 44% battery weight in a 350 lbs vehicle. Care to tell us
more?
It was originally speced at 48V and 180lbs of batt weight... so 270 is
probably out of spec for this sort of vehicle. I have had good luck with
Hawkers in my toys. I'll take a look more closely at both Orbitals and
Hawkers. This rig is classed as a MC, but it's really little more than a 35
MPH bicycle. I do have a trailer (beautiful design for one of my toys) that
can hold a pair of these Optima batts... far more room than I needed for
that toy. I just don't like dragging trailers around, even if the controller
could possibly handle 48 and 72V.
> If you drive 25 miles at 40 mph, you're discharging the batteries in
> just over half an hour. That makes Optimas (or Hawkers or Orbitals) a
> good choice.
Well, choice of route will really determine my speed. The 40MPH road is my
first and last path to cover. Distance at 40 would be about 14 blocks... a
bit over a mile. The rest of the commute is at a bit slower speed. I'm just
looking at the most convient route... which is mostly 40 and 35 MPH speeds.
(I could keep my speed to 18MPH, if I take alternate routes. Only about 1/2
mile difference in distance, but *much* greater in time taken.) I'm trying
to find a rig that'll come close to meeting my currently timed route, so I
don't go w/ the ICE, instead of the EV. My previous route took 18 minutes in
the ICE, and about 45 minutes on a bike. The toy would have cut that 45
minutes by about 10 or 15... which would have made it "practical". Currently
I don't mind adding an extra 10-15 minutes to my commute, which should make
this practical... but if I miss the van, it will be ugly. <g>
> These are all AGMs. Plan on a better charger and some form of battery
> management or they won't last long!
Such as? I'd love to have a batt management system that will work. Following
the Sparrow group, I didn't see that BMS did them any good... or perhaps
their pack was already fried before they installed the system. (After
Sparrow went under, it seemed common to read, "Paid 16K, invested 22K" sort
of ads.)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thank you. I've had Excides and fried both packs. (Well, one pack was fried
before I owned the car. They were great... gave me a great price... on the
pack I fried. <VBG>) This is a tiny rig and probably won't carry that sort
of weight.
I would love to hear about these fires. I take great care to isolate my
batts from the home (and have installed an external charging station.) I
don't wish to use a batt that has even the slightest chance of fire (or
failure) during use. Somehow, having your car catch fire doesn't seem like
the best way of proceeding. Just call me conservative.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: Optima batteries
> The Larger Optima Batterys (D31) perform a little better overall than the
smaller ones. If you are considering an installation, put them somewhere
where they can be reached. They can perform well.
>
> BUT,
>
> occassionally, the spirals will short out, causing the batteries to
internally heat up and catch your vehicle on fire .... :-( Normally, this
sometimes occurs under high amperage loads, but can happen under normal
loads (50-150 amps).
>
> They are supposed to work under more harse environments, but, watch out.
>
> Try the exides if you can, the performance is a little lower, but the cost
is down quite a bit. If Floodies can work, probably a good bet.
>
> Peter
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jerry: I loved chatting to you, way back when. Care to contact me off list
to discuss this further?
I'd love to hear where you've been in your EVs over the years. (Where ever I
go, there you are. <g>)
mperry at evn dot org
I'd especially like to hear of your latest. It sounds similar to what I'm
trying to head for.
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 4:51 AM
Subject: Re: Optima batteries
>
> Hi Michael and All,
>
>
> ----- Original Message Follows -----
> From: "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Optima batteries
> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 21:44:00 -0800
>
> >When I first started monitoring the EV lists, the Optima
> >was one of the favorite batteries for smaller rigs with
> >less than 1 hour of cruise range, especially in the smaller
> >(under 1000 lb) vehicle. If I recall, Lee was one of the
> >fans of this batt. If I also recall, this batt performs
> >well in a variety of high load situations, such as 1/4 mile
> >cars???
> >
> >I am considering a new rig that's 1/2 the weight of my 1000
> >pound Freeway, probably sticking with the 72V pack that I'm
> >familiar with. I'd be interested if this is still one of
> >the better choices. I'm figuring that this will probably do
> >25 miles @ my 25-40 MPH commute. The roller chassis is
> >about 350 pounds.
>
> Glad to hear your doing a new 3wheeler. At least you
> know what not to do from the Freeway EV you had!! Please
> keep us informed on it?
>
>
> >
> >Questions:
> >Would this still be a good choice of battery?
>
> You will be getting 15% or so less range over
> flooded batts for the same weight. I'd reccomend the BB600
> ni-cads as an excellent replacement for Yt's at a lower cost
> and they would last about forever in it. After you get use
> to charging them, just a dumb charger and a timer works for
> charging them.
> And you don't have to charge them each time or all
> the way up, only when they get low and work well in colder
> weather. I used to run mine a week running to the store,
> ect, before charging my smaller versions in my e
> bikes/trikes.
>
>
> >
> >Does anyone have any experience w/ the Optima look-alike
> >batts? They are about 60% of the cost of the Optima, but
> >cost isn't everything.
>
> Others seem to have good results from Orbital but the
> same range deal applies as the YT's though slightly less.
>
> >
> >It appears the blue or yellow tops are the way to go. Are
> >there differences and, if so, which is "better" for an EV?
>
> I believe the blue tops are slightly lighter so go
> with the YT's between those.
>
> Jerry Dycus
> >
> >They also have the "Troll" kit. This apparently holds a
> >pair of batts and comes in 3 "flavors"... just the kit
> >(bolts two batts down), the kit with a charger, and the kit
> >with charger and a pair of batts. Given the low cost of the
> >charger, I assume it's not the greatest. Any experience?
> >Also, is this kit strong enough? I'd like to have some
> >safety in case of an accident. An accident in a small car
> >is dangerous enough, but if a couple hundred pounds of lead
> >goes flying around, things could turn even uglier.
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In some alternator circuits the R wire goes through the alternator light on
the dash and then to a fuse on the ignition on circuit.
This alternator lamp provides a resistance to the regulator circuit to
control the amount of charging circuit. I first tested my alternator with
the light and then without. This decrease or increase the charging voltage.
For my alternator, which is different than a standard, I had to use a 10 ohm
resistor which replaces the lamp. On a standard alternator, you may get by
without it, but I would just leave the lamp in the circuit if you are not
going to change the dash like I did.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darin - at - metrompg.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: Controlling an alternator (without wrecking it)?
> Roland Wiench wrote:
> > If you have a two wire control alternator that has two wires in the
> > small
> > plastic plug, One wire ( the small one comes from the ignition circuit
> > that
> > provides 12 volt this R wire or to the regulator. There is a larger red
> > wire in this plastic plug that is connected directly to battery B+.
> > All
> > you have to do is to switch off the R wire to stop the alternator
> > generated
> > output.
>
> Thanks for that info. There is also a third wire, which would go to the
> idiot light (which I can probably ignore).
>
> > I use a deep cycle battery for my 12 volt accessory battery, so I can
> > discharge it more deeply than a standard battery.
>
> I'll likely do the same thing.
>
> Cor van de Water wrote:
> > I have the idea that Darin asked about the possibility to regen
> > into his pack, instead of into the 12V battery.
>
> Actually, I was thinking about "baby steps", and would probably attempt
> regen to the 12v accessory battery as an introductory project before
> diving in to mod the guts of the alternator for traction pack regen.
>
> That said, thanks for the info on how to do that mod.
>
> At this point, regen of any type is fairly far down the "to do" list.
> We're just at the battery rack fabrication stage.
>
> Where I live is fairly flat and traffic is sparse enough that I suspect
> I'd maximize range more through anticipatory coasting than by powering
> up to stops and jumping on the regen via the brake pedal for the last
> few car lengths. Still, there will undoubtedly be times when I'll wish
> I had it.
>
> Glad to know both the 12v and pack voltage approaches are doable.
>
> Thanks for the ideas & feedback, everyone.
>
> Darin
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have thought about this since high-school (those that know me, know
that is quite a while)
I wouldn't expect to get much out of it but enough to help offset some
of the power used in active dampening.
One idea was to put distance sensors on the body of the car and maintain
a motionless body to the "calculated plane of operation".
calculated plane of operation = 8 sensors 2 front,2 @ 1/4 back, 2 at 3/4
back and 2 at rear. Choose the 6 that are closest to each other and
throw out the other two then calculate a plane that best fits the
remaining points and move use the shocks to override the springs to keep
the body X above that plane.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Michael Perry
>What causes the low cycle life? Is it just their general design, or the lack
>of protection during charging? Or perhaps extreme abuse (such as in drag
>racing)? Or... in worse case... that the batts simply don't stand up?
It's just how they're built. The designer of a battery has to make lots of
tradeoffs. He can maximize life, or amphour capacity, or peak current
capability -- but maximizing one makes the others worse. In the case of the
Optima, they chose to maximize peak power, and let life and amphour capacity
get worse. Rated life is about 200 cycles to 80% depth of discharge.
>> These are all AGMs. Plan on a better charger and some form of battery
>> management or they won't last long!
>Such as? I'd love to have a batt management system that will work.
For only 4 batteries, your BMS could simply be four good 12v chargers. A good
charger is one that has a well-regulated maximum voltage that it applies for a
predictable length of time, and then shuts off.
>Following the Sparrow group, I didn't see that BMS did them any good...
Lots of things went wrong in the Sparrows. They seem to have provided more than
the usual number of bad examples. :-(
--
Lee Hart
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually that is to be avoided at all costs. You must maintain balanced
forces or the power will effect the suspension and make it almost
undriveable.
Even on moutain bikes with rear suspension, pains are taken to make sure
the tension on tha chain doesn't cause a squat or a hiking of the
suspension.
How about just taking two hub motors and glueing them back to back with
half shafts coming out. It would look like a differential and could
function as one if controlled seperately.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Time for me to chime in here ;)
Mark: I too have an S-10 lead sled. And, quite frankly, after the so
called EV grin came the disappointment. I almost gave up EVs for good.
Though I have 144V worth of T-125s, I can't get more than maybe 20 Miles
out of it. That is 'realistic' miles at 55mph. By that time, voltage
reaches approx. 125V under load (150 A) and I don't want to go lower in
order to keep my batteries healthy.
Now - I am not the kind of person who drives while constantly thinking
about how to maybe squeeze a mile more out of the truck. I just want to,
well, drive.
And I don't want to start a new career as a aero-dynamics mechanic. SO - I
had to learn to not to ask too much. The other day, my little truck
carried 6 square bails of hay, 10 x 50 pound bags of sweet-feed and a few
more bags of turkey starter. Yes, I needed a few straps to keep everything
in place :) While I was happily zipping home, I realized that, even though
my led-sled may not go more than maybe 20 or even 25 Miles, it has become
a trusted partner and *never* left me stranded.
Yes, I wish I would have more range, maybe even an air-conditioner or a
heater. And maybe I even live to be able to buy my truck a better power
system. Until that time, I accept its limitations. And, maybe my truck
will even get promoted to become a registered firefighting vehicle with
our local voluntary fire fighters. And I am sure, as long as the fire is
within 20 Miles, the truck will proudly flash its lights and sound the
siren. And it will most certainly flash those lights for days if
necessary.
Though you might want to read some encouraging news.
Michaela.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does this info help ?
http://www.msgroup.org/TIP080.html
http://www.rqriley.com/images/fig-3whl.gif
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Randy Burleson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > As for the squat characteristics, I wouldn't worry much in a
three
> > wheeler where weight transfer is not so critical as a bike, but
> > perhaps I misunderstood your design?
> I was referencing another post's standard swingarm/chassis
behavior.
> When torque is applied from the chassis-mounted motor to the rear
wheel
> via a swingarm, there is:
> * anti-squat upon acceleration (swing-arm pushes the tail end up)
and
> * squat upon deceleration (swing-arm pulls the tail end down)
> Especially with the near-instantaneous torque available from an
electric
> motor, I suspect that it may be easier to move the whole
suspension to
> its upper limit than to spin the rear wheel from a stop, and that
it
> might be easier to move the whole suspension to its lower limit
than to
> stop the rear wheel, at speed... even more-so considering that the
> majority of the mass (batteries) will be on the front axle, so
weight
> transfer should be minimal (other than my own butt).
>
> I guess that I need to white-board a vector diagram out, to see
what
> changes if I mount the swing-arm pivot lower or higher than the
wheelhub
> center. In any case, by mounting the motor to the swingarm, I'd no
> longer be transmitting power across the swingarm pivot to the
chassis --
> when I started writing this email, I thought that might be a good
thing
> (less sure now whether this becomes a hard-tail/soft-tail
discussion).
>
> > I wouldn't want drivetrain parts vibrating with the suspension...
> Is vibration really a significant issue for electric motors? All
the
> other bits would be off the swingarm and mounted to the better-
dampened
> main chassis.
>
> > nor would I want to deal with the effect of adding unsprung
weight.
> Definitely a concern, but negative effects should be reduced (both
> vibration and weight) if you anchor the motor close to the swingarm
> pivot. If anchored exactly on the pivot but attached to the
swingarm, it
> is unsprung weight (with some rotational mass, tho), and most
forces
> imparted by the swingarm would just rotate the motor around its
axis (or
> vice versa, as confused by my first point).
>
> Randii
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: john fisher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 2:12 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative
suspension)
>
> Several of the Chinese mini buggies use a swing-arm rear
suspension like
> an ATV, with concentric sprockets so that there
> is no change at all in chain tension. In fact big sand buggies
often use
> dual swing-arms set up like this. As for the
> squat characteristics, I wouldn't worry much in a three wheeler
where
> weight transfer is not so critical as a bike, but
> perhaps I misunderstood your design?
>
> I wouldn't want drivetrain parts vibrating with the suspension, nor
> would I want to deal with the effect of adding
> unsprung weight. but thats just me.
>
> HTH
> John Fisher
>
> Randy Burleson wrote:
> >>
> > I'm sketching a setup for a 3-wheeler that seems a better
compromise
> --
> > mount the motor to the swing-arm directly. Sprung weight has some
> > disadvantages, but if you mount the motor closer to the pivot,
> effective
> > leverage minimizes this impact. The more common alternative
seems to
> be
> > mounting the motor unsprung and chain/belt-drive to the wheel,
but if
> > you do that, suspension movement is applied directly to
chain/belt
> slack
> > or the motor itself.
> >
> > Are there any obvious flaws to this that those who have gone
before
> can
> > identify?
> >
> >
> > Randii
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How would I mount a single rear wheel into the back of a VW ? could
I use the original torsion bars somehow ??
Like this but 2 passenger .... no cutting
http://www.digitalbiker.com/bugwing.htm
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Randy Burleson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > Now think about a single speed reduction similar to that
> > of an e-scooter. Large gear on the wheel, small one on
> > the motor, chain/belt connecting the two. Why not apply
> > that to a car?
> <snip>
> > The result would be similar to having lightweight hub
> > motors, but without the extra weight in the wheel.
>
> I worry about squat/anti-squat on acceleration, and suspension
forces
> wearing on the motor.
>
> I'm sketching a setup for a 3-wheeler that seems a better
compromise --
> mount the motor to the swing-arm directly. Sprung weight has some
> disadvantages, but if you mount the motor closer to the pivot,
effective
> leverage minimizes this impact. The more common alternative seems
to be
> mounting the motor unsprung and chain/belt-drive to the wheel, but
if
> you do that, suspension movement is applied directly to chain/belt
slack
> or the motor itself.
>
> Are there any obvious flaws to this that those who have gone
before can
> identify?
>
> Decoupling power transmission from the main chassis should assist
in
> minimizing weight elsewhere, and running cables is simple enough.
Take
> this to the full extreme, and you could wind up with a spring
seat, as
> in a semi, with full hard-tail suspension!
>
> I guess I'd rather have suspension, to prevent rattling the
fillings out
> of my EV grin. :p
>
> Randii
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How do you avoid squat? That's one of the considerations on most MC's. Even
using drive shafts, bikes do squat under power. It's even worse when full
power is reversed... something 2 wheel MC's don't encounter.
As you say, hub motors don't have this problem, since the thrust is against
the center shaft. What you get there, even with bicycle sized rigs, is that
the forks must be strong enough to withstand the torque. A bike with
standard forks may not be strong enough to withstand even the small force of
accelerating a bicycle. The hub may actually spread the fork and escape.
(Nothing so much fun as having a front hub motor escape, leaving your with
front forks digging into the pavement at 25MPH!)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Shanab" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
> Actually that is to be avoided at all costs. You must maintain balanced
> forces or the power will effect the suspension and make it almost
> undriveable.
>
> Even on moutain bikes with rear suspension, pains are taken to make sure
> the tension on tha chain doesn't cause a squat or a hiking of the
> suspension.
--- End Message ---
