EV Digest 6520
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: LRR Tires
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Kilovac EV-200 as safety disconnect?
by Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Motor mods
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Safety Disconnect, Knife switches are fun!
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Chevy Metro Weight, now aero
by "James Allgood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Racing Golf Carts WSJ front page
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Motor mods
by "Peter Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Safety Disconnect
by "Bruce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Racing Golf Carts WSJ front page
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Economics of balancing amps (was: Mick's answer to Lee
Hart about BattEQ ...
by Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) 300V EV Questions
by "Adrian DeLeon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) FWD friction
by "Claudio Natoli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Chevy Metro Weight
by Jerry McIntire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Chevy Metro Weight
by "Andrew Kane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Compressed air as battery?
by Lock Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Scale up/down was: Compressed air as battery?
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Motor mods
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Chevy Metro Weight, now aero
by Mike Chancey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Project Review
by "Pestka, Dennis J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) RE: Learning more about electronics. WAS: Re: [Evtech] SCR's last orders
by "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
From: Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: LRR Tires
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 10:40:54 -0800
Going from 0.01 to 0.007 rolling resistance coefficient, I'd expect
the mpg to go up at lower resistance - did you mean to say: change from 48
to 52 MPG?
Oops.. I reversed the numbers: I meant to say "change from 44 to 48 MPG".
but, 48 to 52 is about right, also.
Phil
Note that a new tire (after the initial effects of the first few hundred
miles) has
a thicker thread of softer rubber than an old worn-down tire.
This not only impacts radius, but also rolling resistance (the thread
consumes energy
in the compression/decompression and shape-change while rolling)
Old worn-down tires may not be the safest, but they are the best for
mileage!
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] On
Behalf Of Phil Marino
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 4:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: LRR Tires
>From: "Brian M. Sutin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: EV List <[email protected]>
>Subject: LRR Tires
>Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 22:44:19 -0800
>
> > The 2005 Prius was being driven the same route regularly and over a
> > long period of time so it was possible to get a pretty steady
> > average. The
>route
> > was mainly 70 MPH highway and the Prius was getting 48 MPG with the
>tires at
> > 40 PSI. Over time, same route, same driver, the mileage began to
> > improve reaching 50 MPG at 50,000 miles. As this point the tires
> > were worn to
>the
> > point of needing replacement.
>
>MPG at 70 MPH is so massively dominated by wind resistance over rolling
>resistance that the experimental results are pretty meaningless for
>rolling resistance. As you concluded, they say a lot about calibrating
>the tire diameter. A better experiment would not exceed 40 MPH.
>Please drive more slowly next time!
The air drag is dominant at 70 MPH for the Prius, but I wouldn't call it
massively dominant.
My calculations ( based on frontal area of 2.16 Meters squared, CD = 0.26,
road weight = 3065 #, and tire RR = 0.01) result in the following drags at
70 MPH:
Air drag = 77 #
Tire RR drag = 31 #
So, a change in tire RR could very well show up in his measured MPG.
For instance a change from 0.010 RR to 0.007 RR tires ( a moderate change)
would drop the total drag by 8.5 % . If MPG and drag were proportionally
related, that would result in a change from 48 MPG to 44 MPG. In reality,
the change in MPG would probably be less than that, since some engine
losses are independent of drag.
I agree with you, though, that driving at slower speeds would make tire
drag
comparisons more meaningful.
Phil
>
>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
>
_________________________________________________________________
Don't miss your chance to WIN 10 hours of private jet travel from
Microsoft®
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0540002499mrt/direct/01/
_________________________________________________________________
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a month.
Intro*Terms
https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=4056&p=5117
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> mid pack I have two heinemans in series(pin the handles together), the
> ev250 is handled by the hairball in my case.
>
Jeff
What are the ratings of your breakers? Model numbers?
Thanks
Dave Cover
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey James all
Well I thought I'd let you have a little return giggle
at my expense. I had posted that Bill had decided to
ship me up his spare motor and I've been working on it
a full week. Not 8 full hours a day more a do this
and wait while it cures kinda thing while I keep ahead
of lining up my uncle Dave on lift stuff. I don't
know about James but I do alot of dry fitting so there
are steps and I can't do certain steps untill others
are completed so it's a lengthy process, but in the
end 99% of the time it's gonna drop right in cause I
hate rework.
Being I'd seen that on the one CE plate a had done
prior for Bill, the arc did burn through the fusafab
wrap on the one lead so I wanted to triple wrap these
last ones. Knowing there's just barely room for what
I had put in already I filed down just a little copper
for room for the extra insulation. Having done a few
of these now it came out really tight.
Long story short is when I went to put it on the
housing I didn't account for all that fiberglass wrap
I put on the field coils when I wrapped them, LMAO.
It wasn't bad but just enough pressure to keep the
plate from seating. There's no way anything would
short through the fiberglass but I didn't want any
stress on the ring or leads.
I was able to file the rougher lumps caused from
overlapped fusafab down a tad and it was good to go.
Maybe not quite the lost time you suffered but I was
thinking of you and the payback I was now eating.
On a fun note I ended up using end bells from an ADC
Raymond pump motor I happened just to have gotten in
to use on Bills motors. Being they were the same
basic plates (couple small mods) and they were cherry
and Bills weren't I used them 8^)
So parts of the worlds quickest electric motorcycle
motor started out life as a lift motor, well okay it's
spare motor anyway, hehe. There's something really
cool in giving an old part new life for me, this pair
ought to have one hell of a ride.
Anyway I just wanted to let you know you can take the
pins out of your voodoo doll now James I got some
payback. BTW it is a lot funnier when it's the other
guy, hehe.
Jim (whos laughing now) Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Gocze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 6:18 PM
Subject: Re: Safety Disconnect
>
> Hi All,
> A friend suggested this as a cheap, strong manual disconnect. He used
> a big barrel fuse holder with a piece of copper pipe of the proper
> diameter
> as the connector. You can then feed a plastic rope through the tube
> into the passenger compartment. Pull when freaked out!
>
> It is a little crude, but it beats ruining a motor. It is unlikely to
> weld shut. It could be set up with some conductive grease for good
> contact and ease
> of use.
>
> I wonder how many amps it could handle. I will try it in my S10. I
> have a couple big DC breakers, but I like the lack simplicity of this.
>
> Tom in Maine
> Hi Tom an' EVerybody;
Take it from Plasma Boy of Plasma Boy racing fame! JW uses a simple fuse
holder modded and installed on the Zombie's Tranny hump. A quick pull and
he's shut DOWN! Nobody pulls more amps, outside of the Railroad, than John.
And you can reuse this sorta setup, as he HAS used to get Zombie scrammed
after he had a locked on controller a few years ago. Not only that, it looks
"Factory" Well, John wouldn't have it any other way!
Some body say ya can actually BUY a knife switch, of Frankenstein
sizes, in a Electrical Supply house?
My two poles worth
Bob
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.7/711 - Release Date: 3/5/07
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Geo Storm is more aerodynamic and should use the same components. Back
seat headroom is bad for passengers but great for batteries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geo_Storm
----- Original Message -----
From: "john fisher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: Chevy Metro Weight, now aero
aero values of cars-
jump straight to answer:
Miata or maybe a CRX
cheap, available, modern, robust aftermarket, well-built, cute.
In Europe there's lots of other choices.
what am I considering?
Meyers Manx or sandrail or Tow'd or mini-buggy, none of which are very
aerodynamic.
or maybe a Locost which is slippery.
I don't need to go on the freeway, and I live in So Cal.
when I asked the question elsewhere, most guys said frontal area was a
pretty accurate predictor for production cars.
JF
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Dymaxion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 11:56 AM
Subject: Racing Golf Carts WSJ front page
> The Wall Street Journal has a front page article about racing golf cars.
It is just a sentence, but there is a mention of people bumping up 36 volt
golf carts to 96 volts. One reason for the increasing popularity is golf
carts are cheaper than other off-road toys.
> And they DIDN'T mention Rod Wilde???
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
________
> Have a burning question?
> Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.7/711 - Release Date: 3/5/07
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I really wish you two lazy bums could have had this discussion a
couple of weeks ago! Well, at least I can give you someone to laugh
at besides each other :)
I decided to upgrade the brush leads from the rather wimpy ones that
came with the motor to something that can handle some current. After
much hammering on some 1/2" by 1/8" busbars I had this absolute
beauty:
http://www.electric-lemon.com/?q=node/156
I was even thinking that Jim Husted himself couldn't have done it
better, yeah right! :) All there was left to do was test fit it,
clearance to motor housing looked good, clearence to armature.... hey
why is the armature winding resting on the brush leads???
@%#$%^&@$#!!!
I attempted to re hammer the bars into a different position but they
now look like crap and while I cleared the armature it's only by a
hair and it looks like it's dangerously close to the field coils. I
think I'm just gonna give up on it and install 4 terminals instead.
-Peter (Another caveman with a hammer)
On 3/6/07, Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey James all
Well I thought I'd let you have a little return giggle
at my expense. I had posted that Bill had decided to
ship me up his spare motor and I've been working on it
a full week. Not 8 full hours a day more a do this
and wait while it cures kinda thing while I keep ahead
of lining up my uncle Dave on lift stuff. I don't
know about James but I do alot of dry fitting so there
are steps and I can't do certain steps untill others
are completed so it's a lengthy process, but in the
end 99% of the time it's gonna drop right in cause I
hate rework.
Being I'd seen that on the one CE plate a had done
prior for Bill, the arc did burn through the fusafab
wrap on the one lead so I wanted to triple wrap these
last ones. Knowing there's just barely room for what
I had put in already I filed down just a little copper
for room for the extra insulation. Having done a few
of these now it came out really tight.
Long story short is when I went to put it on the
housing I didn't account for all that fiberglass wrap
I put on the field coils when I wrapped them, LMAO.
It wasn't bad but just enough pressure to keep the
plate from seating. There's no way anything would
short through the fiberglass but I didn't want any
stress on the ring or leads.
I was able to file the rougher lumps caused from
overlapped fusafab down a tad and it was good to go.
Maybe not quite the lost time you suffered but I was
thinking of you and the payback I was now eating.
On a fun note I ended up using end bells from an ADC
Raymond pump motor I happened just to have gotten in
to use on Bills motors. Being they were the same
basic plates (couple small mods) and they were cherry
and Bills weren't I used them 8^)
So parts of the worlds quickest electric motorcycle
motor started out life as a lift motor, well okay it's
spare motor anyway, hehe. There's something really
cool in giving an old part new life for me, this pair
ought to have one hell of a ride.
Anyway I just wanted to let you know you can take the
pins out of your voodoo doll now James I got some
payback. BTW it is a lot funnier when it's the other
guy, hehe.
Jim (whos laughing now) Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
--
www.electric-lemon.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Where might one find "conductive grease"?
I've tried testing the conductivity of Noalox and found it to not be very
conductive at all.
Bruce
Tom Gocze wrote:
> It could be set up with some conductive grease for good
> contact and ease of use.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I guess my question is why do they run such low voltage. Maybe they are
trying to perpetuate the myth that electric golf carts are slow :-) A stock
3.5 hp will take 120 volts just fine with a 500 amp controller. I did blow
one of the brush springs off with our shop cart once we went to a 900 amp
controller but the wheel stands were so much fun! Here is a video clip of a
launch:
http://www.suckamps.com/images/build_team_vehicles/GolfCartWheelie.mov The
range was great also. I do have a real high performance one on mothballs at
the moment. It is set up for 336 volts and a 2000 amp controller. It has a
single nine inch and a full roll cage of course. It has John Wayland's old
wrinkle wall 13" diameter Mickey Thompson racing slicks on the rear. I
predict it should do 0 to 100 mph in the eighth mile in 6 seconds. This was
built years ago. It's a Harley 74. A Harley Davidson golf cart built in
1974.
Roderick Wilde
"Suck Amps EV Racing"
www.suckamps.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Dymaxion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 8:56 AM
Subject: Racing Golf Carts WSJ front page
The Wall Street Journal has a front page article about racing golf cars.
It is just a sentence, but there is a mention of people bumping up 36 volt
golf carts to 96 volts. One reason for the increasing popularity is golf
carts are cheaper than other off-road toys.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Have a burning question?
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.7/711 - Release Date: 3/5/2007
9:41 AM
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Your reply makes no sense to me. I don't think you understand what is
commonly meant when we speak of a "BMS."
The typical BMS will sense battery (or cell) voltage, and
then by-pass or transfer charge as needed. Sometimes the BMS will
sense temperature too. In addition to by-passing or transferring
charge, the BMS might signal the charger (or controller) to shut off,
or cut back because of some out-of-bounds condition that it has sensed.
The charger provides the current for charging (and
purposeful overcharging) not the BMS.
A typical (intelligent charging system) sequence for
charging when a BMS is present on AGM lead-acid is as follows:
1) Bulk charge at normal current until the BMS signals one or more
batteries are at the voltage limit.
2) Cut back the charge current to what the BMS can by-pass.
3) Continue at reduced current until all batteries have reached the
"full" voltage.
4) Hold at the specified pack voltage until the current tapers off to
the specified level (like an amp or less.)
5) Signal the battery regulators to switch off (or switch up to
"finish" voltage.)
6) Switch the charger to constant current mode and push the specified
finish current though the batteries until the correct percentage of
overcharge amp-hrs has gone into the batteries.
7) All done.
The BMS need not be able to by-pass (or transfer) more than
the difference in self-discharge or difference in charge efficiency.
It need not be able to by-pass more than an amp, maybe two. A bypass
system typically needs to be able to handle more current than a
transfer (continuous) system because you don't want to extend the
charge period excessively. You size the by-pass current to pass the
expected amp-hr imbalance in, say, 30 minutes. Thus, an amp or two is
adequate. If the BMS is very intelligent, and is built to sense
voltage differences during the bulk charge, the by-pass current can
be even lower, because it has more time to correct any imbalance.
A continuous system has all day and all night to transfer
the expected amp-hr imbalance. Thus, a fraction of an amp is all that
is typically needed.
Of course, the numbers and steps all change with the battery
chemistry. The above example is for AGM lead-acid.
Bill Dube'
At 02:32 PM 3/5/2007, you wrote:
Hello Bill
A couple of factors your over looking.
AGM and NiMH batteries do get out of balance. Most BMS systems address this
by applying a slight over charge to all the batteries. Batteries are not all
perfect some fail very soon others a little later then the rest.
You are not giving any value to the effect of not taking all the good
batteries and exposing them to the highest level of charge they can
possibly take.
So not are you only bringing up the lowest batteries your also keeping your
best batteries good longer. One might be able to replace a few
failed modules
and retain the others because of less over charging. It is a better charging
algorithm not to kill your best modules in order to just bring up a few low
ones. The ones that are going to fail before the others do
no matter how they
are charged.
The greatest cost of running an EV is the batteries. A thousand dollars up
front is going to save for years. A great value of the balancer is
the damage
you do not have from years of over charging them.
Don
In a message dated 3/5/2007 11:22:11 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is "penny wise and pound foolish" to implement a continuous
balancing system that pushes around a large number of amps. Once you
do the accounting, you discover that it costs you more than you save
if you push around much more than an amp with a continuous type BMS.
The key to this is that individual "bad" batteries in a pack don't
typically "fail" slowly, but rather quickly. Propping up a failing
battery by feeding it significant charge through the BMS increases
its life span just a few percent. When you compare the cost of the
earlier failed individual battery replacement, with the cost of
increasing the transfer amperage of the BMS, you discover you are
spending a lot of money to save a few pennies.
The BMS needs to cover the expected differences in charge efficiency
and self-discharge plus a reasonable margin. That's it. It also
should flag a weak battery, (like a "check engine" light) so you know
you'd better replace it soon.
It is different in an application where you cannot easily replace a
bad battery, like in a spacecraft, or a combat vehicle. However, a
daily driver EV is not that sort of application.
Bill Dube'
At 10:53 AM 3/5/2007, you wrote:
>Lee Hart said:
>
>"Start with two batteries at different states of charge. Connect them
>directly in parallel -- they instantly go to the same voltage!"
>
>Mick says: Check. The paralleled batteries instantly display an average
>voltage. There is still a subtle delta-v, however, and that drives energy
>movement until the batteries match. The current drops, the
delta-v drops and
>the battery differences approach zero. This does take time but eventually
>results in near perfect equalization. The battery differences cannot vanish
>unless the amperage transfer and the delta-v also vanish.
>
>Once the batteries "settle out at the same state of charge" (to use Lee's
>phrase), one battery is no longer trying to finish charge the other one.
>Lee's hypothetical paralleled batteries would then share any
>charge/discharge energy evenly, and there will never be a need to move x
>number of amp-hours from one paralleled battery to the other.
>
>If you clip a load onto the terminals of one battery which is
parallel with
>another, its voltage drops slightly compared to the other one, but the
>difference can never become very great. As soon as the delta-v increases
>energy moves through the parallel cables so that a state of charge
>difference does not develop and no subsequent amp hour restoration is
>needed. A BattEQ equipped series string behaves much the same as if the
>batteries were in parallel, provided that the balancer is
properly sized for
>the application.
>
>Lee said: "It only takes a small amount of force to keep something balanced
>that is already almost perfectly balanced."
>
>Mick says: The word "force" is very appropriate. Instead of waiting until
>big "state of charge" differences have developed, BattEQ applies continual
>force which scales up as needed to prevent SOC differences from occurring.
>The PowerCheq(TM) product is similar in this regard, but the biggest
>PowerCheq can only pump in the same power range as the smallest BattEQ
>devices. Two amps of balancing current is fine for relatively small
>batteries, but drive packs for golf carts or bigger would
require the bigger
>BattEQ units.
>
>Lee said:
>"For batteries that are well matched, or that aren't used much, you'll
>have enough time for a low balance current to work." He later
said: "...when
>there are extenuating circumstances...the number of amphours needed to
>restore balance gets larger. That's where higher power balancers like my
>battery balancer come into play."
>
>Mick says: Please do not equate BattEQ with "low balance current"
and please
>do not categorically state that other solutions are "higher power". I have
>BattEQ units in stock which can pump 16 amps out from each channel
>continuously. This can be verified by those who take the trouble. If that's
>not enough, additional units could be added in parallel. Even with a big
>balancer, the current goes no higher than that required to
maintain balance.
>As soon as one monobloc tries to outperform or under perform, the
group will
>receive "energy discipline" which scales up or down with the delta-v. With
>unruly batteries, the balance current will ramp up until things realign or
>until the design limit of the balancer is reached.
>
>Even when the battery is being recharged, BattEQ does not burn off excess
>energy through heat dissipation. Instead it pumps that into the monoblocs
>that need it. With BattEQ one cannot detect high power in the form of hot
>dissipaters atop a battery bank, because instead the power is
going into the
>weak monoblocs to improve the balancing process.
>
>Lee said: "For an EV, your "daily drive" will produce some degree of
>imbalance. This can be expressed by how many amphours difference is
>required to bring each battery back to the same state of charge. Then, you
>need a balancing system that can produce this much charge differential per
>day."
>
>Mick says: Lee's description above would be correct only if the balancing
>system is deployed after the daily drive is complete. However, because
>BattEQ works 24/7 the battery doesn't develop imbalances to be corrected
>later with "10's of amp hours". Since BattEQ pumps energy in real time to
>maintain alignment, the balancing game becomes one of instantaneous energy
>transfer instead of amp-hour restoration after the fact. So long as the
>instantaneous energy transfer is sufficient, there's never a need
to correct
>an accumulated state of charge deficit.
>
>Mick Abraham
>www.abrahamsolar.com
<BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free
email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at
http://www.aol.com.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
EV #2 is going to be a Toyota pickup conversion. 15-20 mile typical range
at 30-45MPH, relatively hilly terrain. I'd like some suggestions on the
following options:
1) 9" vs 11" motor. I'm thinking 11" because of the hills. My 50A @ 30MPH
VW takes 150-200A to maintain 30MPH on certain road sections. The 11"
should deliver higher torque (at lower RPM) for chugging uphill and have
more power for (occasionally) hauling stuff.
2) 156V vs 300V battery pack. 156V = 26 x 6V floodies. 300V = 25 x Group
31 AGM, possibly Deka GELs. I know AGMs=$$$, but low maintenance and
higher power are tempting. This will be my wife's truck, so the closer it
matches the original ICE "feel" the better.
Contactor: Kilovac EV200/250 (nice discussion recently).
Circuit breaker: 3 Heinemann/Airpax 160V breakers in series w/ trip
handles tied together?
Relays for heater or DC/DC: Another Kilovac? A FET switch with appropriate
fusing? I can't find any relays for 300VDC @ 5-10A.
Finally: Any issues using a stock Warp9 or Warp11 with a 300V pack and
Zilla 1K? (Other than the impact on my wallet?)
-Adrian
.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
at the Sydney AEVA workshop last night, I mentioned the EVDL's "1-finger push
test", which our vehicle (Daihatsu Charade) certainly fails.
One thing I've noticed is that, with the front wheels elevated and with the
gearbox in neutral, hand spinning the front (drive) wheels takes considerable
effort. It is difficult to get them up to any sort of speed (ie. 1 rev / sec),
and they stop in a quarter turn or so. By comparison, I recently had
opportunity to try the same thing with an original ICE variant owned by a
friend, and it was considerably easier, and the drive wheel would spin for a
few seconds from a similar speed.
This of course sparked a great deal of curiosity at the workshop, so we jacked
up the front (drive) wheels of our EV, and everyone had a go at turning the
front wheels with a view to seeing whether they thought the friction was high
or normal for a FWD. Typically, opinions varied considerably.
I was therefore wondering whether other owners of FWD EVs, or those with
similar experience, could chip in their 0.2 kh.hrs worth? Does this sound
normal for a FWD? Should the drive wheels spin more freely? Could choice of
gearbox oil, which is the simplest thing for me to change, have a dramatic
impact?
Depending on comments I'll probably try changing out the oil in the gearbox on
the weekend. While I'm working on the car, is there anything else that I could
check? There are any numbers of contributors (gearbox, wheel-bearings,
dragging brakes, ...), but is there a simple way to differentiate to identify
the biggest culprits?
Cheers,
Claudio
Sydney AEVA - for Electric Vehicle enthusiasts in Sydney, Australia
http://sydneyaeva.googlepages.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ian, nice spreadsheet. I looked at specs for quite a few vehicles
when I was making plans, before I bought an EV.
Don't know if more than two seats is important to you, but it was to
me. All of these are 4 door.
The ones I liked which are missing from your list:
1990-91 Honda Civic wagon- 2300 lbs
1990-94 Subaru Loyale wagon- 2400 lbs, 7" ground clearance, probably
my first choice, I like to haul and tow stuff
1992-97 Ford Escort- 2500 lbs
1992-96 Eagle Summit wagon- 2730 lbs, 7" ground clearance, easy to
get in and out
Newer vehicles
2003-06 Toyota Matrix- 2,700 lbs, 6" clearance
2003-06 Pontiac Vibe- 2,700 lbs, 8" clearance (Matrix and Vibe are
twins except for clearance, styling)
1996-2000 Toyota RAV4- 2800 lbs, good clearance
I would stay away from VW unless it's an old Beetle or Ghia. I've
owned several newer ones, and spent lots of time and money fixing
little things apart from the motor and trans. Pain in the neck.
Toyota made a nice wagon in the early 1990's also.
Jerry
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I would guess that "cstdwn" refers to something called "coastdown"
which is essentially the rate at which a powered flywheel's rotational speed
decreases when the power is shut off. Some automobile magazines (like
Road&Track IIRC) used to publish results of a "coastdown test" which was
elapsed time for deceleration from speed X to speed Y. Thus it indirectly
relates to aero drag in this context, as well as to rolling resistance and
mechanical losses.
On 3/6/07, David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The U.S. gov't EPA spreadsheets are a goldmine for information like this:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/tcldata.htm
For the older spreadsheets I think it listed effective frontal areas
(Cd*A). The newer ones list a "cstdwn" column, but I wasn't able to find
documentation for that column or even figure out if it related to
aerodynamics -- does anyone know how to decode the newer spreadsheets for
aero data?
Also, fuel economy is a pretty good first-order estimate for how efficient
a car will be as an EV.
----- Original Message ----
From: Ian Page-Echols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2007 11:23:22 AM
Subject: Re: Chevy Metro Weight
As it's taking me forever to get started on building my electric car,
I've been doing a bunch of poring over stats of various cars trying
to figure out what features, shapes, weights, and sizes might be
helpful. Here's a link to a spreadsheet I've created with a bunch of
this. If anyone has any cars I should add, or different attributes
of the cars I should find, please let me know.
One specific thing I've had a hard time finding is the drag
coefficients of various vehicles. Does anyone know a place to find
this info?
The link:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pF3I_WlZtXKEUmB-YH-JnZA
Hope it's useful to someone, Ian
On Mar 6, 2007, at 9:46 AM, Ted Sanders wrote:
> go to http.www.carsplusplus.com
>
> They have car specs beginning in 1970
>
> Beano -- 1981 Ford Escort EV
> Ted Sanders
>
>
>> From: mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: [email protected]
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Chevy Metro Weight
>> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 05:41:29 -0800 (PST)
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> I recently purchased a 1998 Chevy Metro.
>> GM dropped the "Geo" name in that year.
>>
>> It seems to be a little heavier. I haven't found the
>> weight on the car, but some books say 1895 pounds, not
>> exactly the 1600 pounds, I was hoping for.
>>
>> I can't get the car to scale, because it doesn't run.
>>
>> Does anyone know what years of the Geo Metro were the
>> lightest?
>>
>> And are there any improvements that are worth the
>> weight?
>> Maybe better crash protection?
>>
>> Thanks a lot!
>>
>> Michael Golub
>> Fairbanks, AK
>>
>> http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/home.htm
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If nothing else, how about converting a bicycle into an air/human
> powered hybrid? It scales the whole project down to a manageable size
> and cost. And if you run out of air, you can always pedal home!
This thinking works for EVs as well ;-)
tks
Lock
Toronto
human-electric hybrid pedestrian
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: mike young
> > I don't care i just wanna have an air car and an EV in my
> > driveway-maybe I can get to town and back with it just on
> > a 120 psi charge from my craftsman compressor and blow my
> > air horn on the way past the gas stations
>
> Hey, then go for it! As long as the distance to town isn't too bad,
> it will work. Just don't expect a range as good as an electric car.
>
> If nothing else, how about converting a bicycle into an air/human
> powered hybrid? It scales the whole project down to a manageable size
> and cost. And if you run out of air, you can always pedal home!
> --
> Lee Hart
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> --- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If nothing else, how about converting a bicycle into an air/human
> > powered hybrid? It scales the whole project down to a manageable size
> > and cost. And if you run out of air, you can always pedal home!
>
> This thinking works for EVs as well ;-)
> tks
> Lock
>
Along the same lines of "scaling down", I thought of the Current
Eliminator when I came across this -
http://www.electronickits.com/robot/CK21667.htm -
and thought "OT on the EVDL" when I saw this one -
http://www.electronickits.com/kit/complete/solar/hracerfuelcellcarkit.htm
...may not agree with FC as the future, but that little car would
scale *up* nicely as an EV!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 08:13 PM 6/03/07 -0800, you wrote:
Hey James all
Well I thought I'd let you have a little return giggle
at my expense.
Next motor (the second of the pair). Stripped it down tonight.... well, I
should have stripped it down before starting into the overhaul and mods to
the first one...
burnt fields, down to frame.
It's been repaired before - and I guess South Australian motor shops have
short-cut takers like some Tassie shops have. By the looks of it the motor
had chafed through to one of the field poles, been pulled down and the
field poles had been taped around, and reassembled and heavily painted.
Everything was stuck together, and the motor has tape around the pole
pieces that the other motor didn't have.
OK Jim, have your laugh, then tell me if fields are available for that
motor... and if so are they an arm and a leg?
I suspect at this point that Don will probably be getting one of my other
motors...
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
James Algood wrote:
The Geo Storm is more aerodynamic and should use the same
components. Back seat headroom is bad for passengers but great for batteries.
The Geo Storm is not mechanically related to the Geo Metro at all and
shares no components. The Geo "line" are simply badge related not
mechanically related. The Metro is a Suzuki Swift, the Storm is an
Isuzu Impulse and the Prism is Toyota Corolla. They don't share any
common parts. GM just sold these unrelated cars under a single brand name.
Thanks,
Mike Chancey,
'88 Civic EV
Kansas City, Missouri
EV Photo Album at: http://evalbum.com
My Electric Car at: http://www.geocities.com/electric_honda
Mid-America EAA chapter at: http://maeaa.org
Join the EV List at: http://www.madkatz.com/ev/evlist.html
In medio stat virtus - Virtue is in the moderate, not the extreme
position. (Horace)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Gentleman;
It is time for me to S _ _ _ or get off the pot on my 1965 Datsun truck.
I've been procrastinating long enough.
I am in the process of building my battery boxes, and have most of those
details have been worked out.
(2) in the radiator area, (3) on each side of the driveshaft, (4) behind
the rear end with room for "Future(3) more".
Below is the proposal on what direction I would like to take with this
rest of this conversion.
Please comment on any or all items.
My original intent was to go to one supplier that could supply all my
components, plus a design package.
I've been having trouble coming up with this source.
Some of the hang-ups are my intent to use a Zilla controller, sealed
batteries, retained clutch.
Since this is my first conversion, I am a little reluctant to strike out
on my own.
I have started to put together my own design schematic, and would feel
better if I could get someone to bless it.
Is this something that EV Parts or the other suppliers can do?
Any suggestions?
Thanks;
Dennis
Here is my tentative plan and specs on my truck.
Performance Desired:
15 mile everyday range @ ~ 50 MPH, with an occasional trip of 25
miles.
60 mile top speed.
0 - 60 MPH in 10 ~ ?? seconds.
2% max grade in limited areas.
1 passenger
20 lbs cargo.
Truck Specifications:
1965 Datsun L320 pickup.
2180 lb. curb weight with 3900 lb. GVW
Glider weight should be ~ 1650 lb.
Small frontal area ~ 12 sq ft
24" Diameter Tires
1st gear = 3.940
2nd gear = 2.400
3rd gear = 1.490
4th gear = 1.00
Differential = 4.875
Conversion Specifications:
- 144V system (12) Odyssey PC1700/65 AGM Batteries - 731 lbs.
Have room for at least (3) more batteries; Could
take voltage to 180V.
- Regulators to keep me from murdering my batteries.
- Adapter to retain the clutch. Anyone want to talk me into
Direct Drive with no Transmission?
- Advance Motor - FB14001A, or talk me into a Warp.
- Zilla Z1K or 1200A Raptor controller, or ?. If I use the
Zilla, it gives me the option at a later date to go with
a higher voltage and/or battery combinations, if I am
unsatisfied with Range or Performance.
- DC/DC converter for 144V.
- Charger: What charger do you recommend? I have 240V, 30A
available in my garage, but would it be better to stay
with 120V, making remote charging easier?
Are there chargers available that will operate on either
voltage?
Should I consider a charger that can go to higher voltages if
I decide to add more batteries later?
- In addition I would like all the standard conversion and
safety parts for a normal conversion.
- Additional accessories I would like to have:
Tachometer kit
Heating kit
Lift kit for pickup bed.
- I will be using the same high quality Orange 4/0 cable that
John put in the White Zombie, since I have a large
supply that I was able to acquire at the right price, "Free".
Also have quite a few high quality 4/0 lugs.
Thanks;
Dennis Pestka
1106 South Hwy. W
Elsberry, MO 63343
Home: (573) 898-2329
Cell: (314) 623-9495
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
------_=_NextPart_001_01C760B8.5083CA3E"
Subject: Project Review
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 06:58:34 -0600
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thread-Topic: Project Review
Thread-Index: AcbWXQYzsEM/8bSQSTCmJXv6hb+cLyFHE+IgAU210LA=
From: "Pestka, Dennis J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV Discussion Group" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Schadt, Andrew M--
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Subject: RE: Learning more about electronics. WAS: Re: [Evtech] SCR's last
orders
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 08:06:48 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
If you are interested in learning more about electronics the Navy's
NEETS modules are a great reference. Here is a link to all of them in
pdf form:
http://www.phy.davidson.edu/instrumentation/NEETS.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Kenigson
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 16:03
To: [email protected]
Subject: Learning more about electronics. WAS: Re: [Evtech] SCR's last
orders
On 3/6/07, Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The gate-to-cathode input of an SCR behaves like the base-to-emitter
junction of an NPN transistor, i.e. like a forward-biased diode.
...and then the defromulator connects to the plendergast joint to
emulate a three-frip mertoblorg... ;)
Actually, it's starting to make a little sense to me. Thanks for
putting up with a newbie! I'm really enjoying learning more about
electronics. I guess I should really take some classes or get some
books and study up. My father-in-law still has his books from an old
famous mail order electronics course. Maybe I can borrow them from him.
Matt
--- End Message ---
