EV Digest 6995
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Tesla Roadster Battery Pack
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: the eVette
by "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Vicor DC-DC
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: easy (back on topic)
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5) V-Infinity DC-DCs (was Re: Vicor DC-DC)
by Ian Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) World's Quickest Electric Vehicles in Portland, OR - 7/13/07 and 7/14/07
by "Roy LeMeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Building LiFePO4 packs from many, many 18650s (was Re: Tesla Roadster
Battery Pack)
by Marcin Ciosek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Tesla Roadster Battery Pack
by Marcin Ciosek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: battery carrying straps wtb??
by mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Knoxville Area happenings?
by "TrotFox Greyfoot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11)
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: the eVette
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Motors
by "storm connors" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: the eVette
by John Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: the eVette
by "Tom S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Sailboat Conversion
by "storm connors" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Tesla Roadster Battery Pack
by =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jukka_J=E4rvinen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Tesla Roadster Battery Pack
by Marcin Ciosek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: ADC Sep Ex or Perm-132 ?
by dale henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Knoxville Area happenings?
by "storm connors" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Tesla Roadster Battery Pack
by =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jukka_J=E4rvinen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: ADC Sep Ex or Perm-132 ?
by "Dmitri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) RE: ADC Sep Ex or Perm-132 ?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) bury batts was: Re: Free Energy
by "patrick DonEgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) [Fwd: Re: Fiero conversions..?]
by Ken Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Simple, Peter has it right:
375 v / 3.6 volt per cell = about 104 cells or little less that are in
series or about 99 cells.
Then: 6831 cells /99 cells = about 69 strings in parallel
The 99 by 69 combination is the only number that will come out even or you
would have to cut a battery into sections.
The 375 volts is the normal pack voltage where the actual voltage will be a
little higher than that.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Tesla Roadster Battery Pack
> 69 in parallel 99 in series.
>
> On 7/5/07, Joseph T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 11 modules. 6831 cells. 621 cells per module. 3.6 volts tmes 11 is
> > about 40 volts. (that doesn't make sense!)
> >
> > I'm assuming that within each module is even more multiple parallel
> > strings?
> >
> > On 7/5/07, Zeke Yewdall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > multiple parallel strings.
> > >
> > > On 7/5/07, Joseph T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > The Tesla Roadster battery pack has 6,831 cells. The Tesla Roadster,
> > > > I've heard, is supposed to be 375 volts. Hmm...Lithium Ion batteries
> > > > are rated at 3.6 nominal voltage. So....3.6 volts times 6,831 cells
> > > > obviously doesn't equal 375 volts!!! What's going on here?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Zeke Yewdall
> > > Chief Electrical Engineer
> > > Sunflower Solar, A NewPoint Energy Company
> > > Cell: 720.352.2508
> > > Office: 303.459.0177
> > > FAX documents to: 720.269.1240
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > www.cosunflower.com
> > >
> > > CoSEIA Certified
> > > Certified BP Solar Installer
> > > National Association of Home Builders
> > >
> > > Quotable Quote
> > >
> > > "In the dark of the moon, in flying snow,
> > > in the dead of winter, war spreading,
> > > families dying, the world in danger,
> > > I walk the rocky hillside
> > > sowing clover."
> > >
> > > Wendell Berry
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> www.electric-lemon.com
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I for one am very interested in it. I don't think that it would be very
highway stable but I haven't driven it.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of TrotFox Greyfoot
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 12:50
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: the eVette
John,
I'll grant that you're correct. I was assuming that Tom was showing
this as a design that's ready to use by the general public, on the
roads. I do not doubt that his videos are real and that the car is
drivable and "generally" stable.
If that is not the case, I apologize. It woulda been nice if he'd Said
so though.
Trot, the un-bristled, fox...
On 7/5/07, John Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You guys have missed some essential points about Tom's car, IMO. In
> treating it as some sort of challenge to be debunked, you haven't
> noticed what he has achieved, assuming the small pix and video are
> fair representations.
--
| /\_/\ TrotFox \ Always remember,
| ( o o ) AKA Landon Solomon \ "There is a
| >\_/< [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ third alternative."
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Re: Vicor power supplies as DC-DC ?
by "John G. Lussmyer" ....
>07:23 AM 7/5/2007, Jeff Major wrote: >The basic Vicor unit is a DC/DC
converter. When >in a >flatpac, they put a front end to rectify AC. If you
>have the correct DC voltage >input, I think it would >work going right
thru the rectifier.
>Yeah, but I just found the specs for this unit online. It doesn't have a
100-240V input >range. It has a 100-120/200-240VAC input range. Same as an
IOTA. I need something with >a 130-200VDC input range. Using 3 of these 5V
units would be around $100, which is >pretty cheap, but I'm not sure if the
voltage range is workable. -- John G. Lussmyer
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I
dream....
I have seen Vicor DC-DC's that *might* suit your needs. These are 150V DC
input and according to the Vicor specs the input can be as low as 100V,
for full output, and brown out at 85V. The max input, IIRC, is 165V. The
output, 400W, can be trimmed to +110% and -50%. They were a Mega Module
VI-MB52-EQ.
I don't know if you could series them but Parallel would be easy.
Jim
'93 Dodge TEVan
'88 Fiero ESE
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you?
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mitchell,
your question, what's the minimum voltatge you can run the motor at to be
safe.
I ask a 2nd question. what accelaration is safe so that on your daily drive
you aren't getting run over or causing others to stop quickly???
I highly recomend 120 Volts DC or higher for reasonable acceleration.
I drive my car daily, so am much more concerned with my EV's daily
performance (which is neither stellar nor dangerous).. I only rarely get a
jerk who can't fathom why I'm accelerating slowly from one red light to the
next red light.
I only work around my car's high voltage monthly.
Yeah, I've had a tingle, a fire (18 volt related short), 1st degree burns
when crossing 144 volts in front of me but not making myself part of the
circuit). dropped one wrench across terminals, and once plugged a 48 volt
pack into a 144 volt pack and was able to disconnect them before anything
melted.
(all in the last decade). and I think I'm still normal.
I'm sure there's guys who have worked with way higher voltages and have
never had a thing happen to them.
Electricians work on 4160 or 480. There's a way to do it without killing
yourself.
If you're accident prone, maybe working on high voltages isn't for you?
the smaller cars like VW rabbits and similar can operate below 120 Volts.
The bigger and heavier you get, means more volts needed to maintain the
same current.
Designing an EV is like a chemical plant. You are limitting by the
smallest opening.
Size your motor, controller, batteries &, wires to work together.
If you want more details, please ask.
Ben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is anyone familiar with V-Infinity DC-DCs? e.g this one looks pretty
appropriate:
http://www.v-infinity.com/adtemplate_child.asp?
c=866954&p=274716&catky=328060&subcatky1=273602&subcatky2=942530#
The downside: they're kind of expensive.
-Ian
On 06/07/2007, at 12:49 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: Vicor power supplies as DC-DC ?
by "John G. Lussmyer" ....
07:23 AM 7/5/2007, Jeff Major wrote: >The basic Vicor unit is a DC/DC
converter. When >in a >flatpac, they put a front end to rectify AC.
If you
have the correct DC voltage >input, I think it would >work going
right
thru the rectifier.
Yeah, but I just found the specs for this unit online. It doesn't
have a
100-240V input >range. It has a 100-120/200-240VAC input range.
Same as an
IOTA. I need something with >a 130-200VDC input range. Using 3 of
these 5V
units would be around $100, which is >pretty cheap, but I'm not
sure if the
voltage range is workable. -- John G. Lussmyer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I
dream....
I have seen Vicor DC-DC's that *might* suit your needs. These are
150V DC
input and according to the Vicor specs the input can be as low as
100V,
for full output, and brown out at 85V. The max input, IIRC, is
165V. The
output, 400W, can be trimmed to +110% and -50%. They were a Mega
Module
VI-MB52-EQ.
I don't know if you could series them but Parallel would be easy.
Jim
'93 Dodge TEVan
'88 Fiero ESE
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com – What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you?
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Folks
The following is being sent out to Portland media outlets and I am working
on a couple of radio spots.
I will leave it up to Plasma Boy to provide info on the other get-togethers
surrounding the Wayland Invitational III.
Be There!
Roy LeMeur
NEDRA NW Regional Director
www.nedra.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: NEDRA Electric Drag Racing-
Wayland Invitational III 7/13/07 and 7/14/07 at Portland International
Raceway - 6PM till Midnight.
CONTACT:
Roy LeMeur
NEDRA NW Regional Director-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The National Electric Drag Racing Association-
www.nedra.com
************************************************************************
EVENT:
NEDRA Electric Drag Racing Wayland Invitational III 7/13/07 and 7/14/07 at
Portland International Raceway - 6PM till Midnight.
************************************************************************
In addition to many other electric racers, we are pleased to have both the
quickest EV in the world and the quickest street-legal EV competing at this
event.
They are-
The "KillaCycle", the world's quickest electric vehicle.
8.168 seconds @ 155.74 mph in the quarter mile.
Vehicle Owner- Bill Dube'
www.killacycle.com
The "White Zombie", the world's quickest street-legal electric vehicle.
11.948 seconds @ 109.75 mph in the quarter mile.
Vehicle Owner- John Wayland
www.plasmaboyracing.com
At this event, the White Zombie will, for the first time, be using the
extremely powerful and lightweight Lithium-Ion batteries used by the
KillaCycle. These batteries will shave hundreds of pounds off the car and
should produce show-stopping acceleration.
Come and see EVs beat gas cars at their own game on the dragstrip. NEDRA
racers spend pennies recharging their vehicles between rounds and our
vehicles run quicker and faster as the batteries warm up during the charging
and discharging process. There will be a good variety of race vehicles,
conversion EVs on display, electric bikes and scooters.
For additional information on this event please contact Roy LeMeur or visit
www.nedra.com. See electric drag racing videos at www.plasmaboyracing.com
ABOUT NEDRA - The National Electric Drag Racing Association (NEDRA) exists
to increase public awareness of electric vehicle (EV) performance and to
encourage through competition, advances in electric vehicle technology.
NEDRA achieves this by organizing and sanctioning safe, silent and exciting
electric vehicle drag racing events.
NEDRA is a coalition of drag racing fans, electric drag racing vehicle
owners and drivers, individuals interested in promoting the sport of EV drag
racing, EV parts suppliers, EV manufacturers and other environmentally
concerned companies and individuals. Working together as a group, we put
excitement into electric vehicle drag racing.
Roy LeMeur
NEDRA NW Regional Race Director
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- END -
_________________________________________________________________
http://newlivehotmail.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
generally I have on testbench a system build of 42P46S.
>From my experience PHET cells are so well selected that so far I don't have
problems with them and BMS is controlling/balancing only 46 blocks in string.
Doing something so complicated like Tesla did is way too expensive and I don't
find it useful - if one cell will fail you have to replace whole block and
since cells are spot-welded together you can not replace single cell. You
just have nice paperweight.
So my idea for next prototype is to build it with smaller blocks. It will be
easier to handle and easier to manage the heat that is generated during high
load.
Marcin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
First - nominal voltage of Li-ion cells varies with chemistry:
LiMnO2 - 3.8V
Li-NCM or LiCoO3 - 3.7V
LiFP - 3.2V
I heard somewhere that Tesla is using LiFP cells.
On Thursday 05 July 2007 17:19:55 Joseph T. wrote:
> The Tesla Roadster battery pack has 6,831 cells. The Tesla Roadster,
> I've heard, is supposed to be 375 volts. Hmm...Lithium Ion batteries
> are rated at 3.6 nominal voltage. So....3.6 volts times 6,831 cells
> obviously doesn't equal 375 volts!!! What's going on here?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Funny, that those batteries I purchased from Sam's
Club, came with a plastic strap that was bolted to the
two lead posts.
However, they seem to have changed brands and now that
strap is not attached.
Does the acid eat the nylon strap?
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mike golub wrote:
> > Does anyone recommend any decent pair of
> > battery carrying straps/handles???
>
> Not offhand. But I do *not* recommend carrying a
> battery by its terminal
> posts. This is a good way to crack the seals around
> the post so they
> leak, or even damage the internal connections.
>
> My 12 Concorde AGMs are in two boxes; 6 in front, 6
> in back. The rear
> box is oversized, about 24" x 27". It was easy to
> lower the batteries in
> place (room for fingers on the sides). When one
> failed, I could slide
> the others over to get at the bottom to lift it out.
>
> The front box is a tight fit, 21" x 24". The last
> battery was lowered in
> using a battery carrier that attached to the
> posts. It just dawned on
> me that this battery was the first one to fail, with
> an internal open.
>
> I'm changing the pack, and discovered that 4 of the
> 6 batteries in that
> front box failed not from low amphour capacity, but
> from excessively
> high internal resistance. One of them went from high
> resistance to
> completely open right after lifting it out with that
> battery strap that
> lifts it by the terminals.
>
> I now suspect that I damaged these batteries by
> lifting them by the
> terminals. Though I got almost 8 years out of them,
> they might have
> still been going had I not done this.
> --
> 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
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So... if you've been paying attention I'm researching what type of
stuff to put in what type of glider to make my EV. Are there any
groups or events in the Knoxville, TN area that I might attend to talk
with some peoples about these things?
Camaraderie is always good. : ]
Trot, the gray, fox...
--
| /\_/\ TrotFox \ Always remember,
| ( o o ) AKA Landon Solomon \ "There is a
| >\_/< [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ third alternative."
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tom S. wrote:
> The advantages are,it holds more batteries so it will go
> farther on a charge.It will out maneuver any 4wheel car any
> time, and its fun to drive.It also has 2 motors twice the power.
Hold more batteries than what? Other EV motorcycles or other EV's based
on Lamorghini kitcar bodies? Ultimately I don't believe it can carry
more batteries than a more conventional 3 or 4-wheeled EV simply because
even if you were to fit more batteries into yours, you are relying on
just 2 wheels (tires, axles, wheel bearings, etc.) to support the weight
while more conventional designs would distribute the same load over 3 or
4 wheels.
Conventional Evs can (and do) also run dual motors, so I don't believe
this is an inherent advantage of your design over them. (In fact, a
conventional EV with a single ADC9" and a Z1K or Z2K can actually have
more power than your dual 9" setup as you are presently limited by your
Curtii controllers' lower current limit and 144V maximum.)
I must also admit to being skeptical the it will have better range that
conventional 4-wheeled EV with the same body due to the use of tires
that ~look~ like they'd be much higher rolling resistance than those of
a conventional conversion, and additional aero drag of the (battery?)
box spanning the full width of the vehicle rear and extending nearly to
the ground.
Maneouverability I won't dispute! ;^> I've driven 4-wheeled vehicles
with steering brakes.
My question is really what advantage do you see your design having over
conventional EVs? Your vehicle design is sophisticated and you've
invested heavily in its devlopment so I have to assume that you believe
that it offers some fundamental advantages over conventional EVs.
At this point all I can come up with on my own is that eliminating the
conventional steering mechanism and dual front wheels frees up space for
more batteries up front, however, since the front wheel is
"non-load-bearing", it seems your design requires the batteries to be
located near/balanced about the rear 'axle' such that it wouldn't
actually be possible to take advantage of the front end space for
stowing batteries.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Technically its a "di-wheel" : a concept that goes almost all the way
Actually, it's technically a trike with a caster wheel and very little
weight on the caster. At least that's how it's described.
Sorry Tom, but it seems like an expensive solution to a problem that isn't
(i.e. the ability to turn on a dime).
Looks like it's loads of fun (if you can ignore the bouncing) but I can't
see it being hugely successful. It would be much easier, and cheaper, to
build a standard three wheeler.
Just out of curiousity, have you tried accelerating rapidly while going
uphill? Or does it have two caster wheels(front and back)?
> back to the safety bicycle. I have mused over similar chassis
> configurations for a couple of years now, and done some dilettante-level
> research. ( if anyone has links or SAE papers or pix, I am always
> grateful). To my knowledge no one has actually built a road-legal
> di-wheel before with differential steering ( unless you count the
> Segway- I didn't because it has some pretty fancy software controls and
> is slow). Now, given that in the auto world, *everything* has been done
> before, I expect somebody to come up with a counter-example, indeed
> thats a part of my motivation. I was thinking of trying a di-wheel
> myself with RC model truck and tank parts, so I wouldn't kill myself in
> a prototype, but if Tom has done what he says he has, then that is
> unnecessary - it *is* possible to steer with differential power/braking
> without massive instability. I was worried it would take
> traction-control + ABS using software ( like a Segway) to make it stable.
>
> This doesn't mean *anything* about the commercial viability or ultimate
> street-worthiness of the concept, not to mention marketability, and that
> brings up my second point: its a *prototype* Its not supposed to be a
> finished product, its a proof of concept. It's not good engineering to
> challenge it on the same grounds you would a production car - those
> problems you bring up, like controller failure, are future issues for
> the millions-of-dollars phase. They are fun to discuss, sure. but they
> aren't properly treated as a failure of design, they are simply work to
> be done.
>
> Since many people on this list drive lead-sleds at or near over-weight
> without improving the suspension or brakes, and/or contemplate
> pusher-trailers, it seems to me you should cut the guy some slack.
>
> Tom, your project would be more credible and indeed more interesting, if
> you simply took some good pictures and posted them on your site. Any
> $150 digital camera will do well enough.
>
> Thats about my 2 cents worth for the week
> cheers
> John
>
>
>>> tom sines replied:
>>>
>>>> Thought you would never ask, go to electricevette.com
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'd like to add to this. Getting the emails fills up your mailbox in a
hurry. The digest makes it difficult to participate. The archive at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/evdl_post_archive/ is the easiest
place to read the emails, but again, contributing is difficult. What I
finally came up with:
Get a Gmail account and only use it for the EV list. All the messages
will be kept together by subject, and searching for a particular
message is easy. If you remember anything about it you can find it
easily. I wish I'd tried it before trying to use the other HA
approaches.
mail.google.com
On 7/5/07, Joseph T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Go to G-mail, there you can select plain formatting. We can't read the
rich formatting.
On 7/4/07, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * ---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 *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> --------------Boundary-00=_KPDOSPT1VA4000000000"
> X-Mailer: IncrediMail (5653017)
> From: "Sam--
>
--
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1059
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Take your pick:
it steers like a true di-wheel
the count of round rolling things is three
What was the point you were making, Peter? That it is pitch-stabilized
by the extra wheel?
heres a fun page on di-wheels
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/TRANSPORT/diwheel/diwheel.htm
and I see I was wrong, the idea goes back to 1870.
John
Here
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
Technically its a "di-wheel" : a concept that goes almost all the way
Actually, it's technically a trike with a caster wheel and very little
weight on the caster. At least that's how it's described.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi John,
Thanks for the input, however First off all a standard three wheeler is
inherently unsafe, the front wheel in tring to steer the bike is what turns it
over. I guess you couldn`t see the chuck hole our car went over in that turn, I
thought the springs worked pretty good on that turn. Florida doesn`t have many
hills so thats so thats not a problem here. By the did I tell you we`ve been
experimenting with driving the car autonomously by computer.
Tom Sines
-----Original Message-----
>From: Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Jul 5, 2007 6:39 PM
>To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>Subject: Re: the eVette
>
>> Technically its a "di-wheel" : a concept that goes almost all the way
>
>Actually, it's technically a trike with a caster wheel and very little
>weight on the caster. At least that's how it's described.
>
>Sorry Tom, but it seems like an expensive solution to a problem that isn't
>(i.e. the ability to turn on a dime).
>Looks like it's loads of fun (if you can ignore the bouncing) but I can't
>see it being hugely successful. It would be much easier, and cheaper, to
>build a standard three wheeler.
>
>Just out of curiousity, have you tried accelerating rapidly while going
>uphill? Or does it have two caster wheels(front and back)?
>
>> back to the safety bicycle. I have mused over similar chassis
>> configurations for a couple of years now, and done some dilettante-level
>> research. ( if anyone has links or SAE papers or pix, I am always
>> grateful). To my knowledge no one has actually built a road-legal
>> di-wheel before with differential steering ( unless you count the
>> Segway- I didn't because it has some pretty fancy software controls and
>> is slow). Now, given that in the auto world, *everything* has been done
>> before, I expect somebody to come up with a counter-example, indeed
>> thats a part of my motivation. I was thinking of trying a di-wheel
>> myself with RC model truck and tank parts, so I wouldn't kill myself in
>> a prototype, but if Tom has done what he says he has, then that is
>> unnecessary - it *is* possible to steer with differential power/braking
>> without massive instability. I was worried it would take
>> traction-control + ABS using software ( like a Segway) to make it stable.
>>
>> This doesn't mean *anything* about the commercial viability or ultimate
>> street-worthiness of the concept, not to mention marketability, and that
>> brings up my second point: its a *prototype* Its not supposed to be a
>> finished product, its a proof of concept. It's not good engineering to
>> challenge it on the same grounds you would a production car - those
>> problems you bring up, like controller failure, are future issues for
>> the millions-of-dollars phase. They are fun to discuss, sure. but they
>> aren't properly treated as a failure of design, they are simply work to
>> be done.
>>
>> Since many people on this list drive lead-sleds at or near over-weight
>> without improving the suspension or brakes, and/or contemplate
>> pusher-trailers, it seems to me you should cut the guy some slack.
>>
>> Tom, your project would be more credible and indeed more interesting, if
>> you simply took some good pictures and posted them on your site. Any
>> $150 digital camera will do well enough.
>>
>> Thats about my 2 cents worth for the week
>> cheers
>> John
>>
>>
>>>> tom sines replied:
>>>>
>>>>> Thought you would never ask, go to electricevette.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>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.
>
________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One of the old "inboard" kits used a belt drive. For forward, you
pulled the pulleys apart tightening the belt. When you pushed the
pulleys together, a rubber block wheel on the input shaft pushed
against the output pulley which turned it in reverse. A hockey puck
turned out to be a fine replacement for the rubber friction wheel. You
could also use a rubber idler wheel between the two pulleys.
On 7/5/07, Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You can buy very nice DC outboard units for boats.
Today, I rented a very nice lap-strake boat with a 500 watt two-speed
electric drive. The boat holds five people, is about 10 feet long,
and has two large 12 volt flooded lead-acid batteries. They looked to
be about 150 to 200 A-hrs each. According to the woman that rents
them out, they run for seven hours on a single charge. I'd guess that
it moved at about 7 knots on the "2" setting.
It was interesting to maneuver the boat to the dock with no
reverse and no steering aside from thrust.
I would think that this commercially-available electric
outboard would be a very nice solution for a modest-sized sail boat.
I'll post a couple of pictures on the KillaCycle website. I
couldn't get a good picture of the nameplate, so I have no idea of
the manufacturer's name. :-(
There were quite a number of these electric-powered boats
sprinkled around the docks and boathouses at Hallstatt lake, so they
must be reasonably priced and commonly available, at least in Austria.
Bill Dube'
At 04:51 AM 6/28/2007, you wrote:
>I need advice on how to reverse the rotation on a series-wound motor.
>
>I am converting a 1968 sailboat from an old, smelly, messy, water
>and air polluting gasoline 4-banger to a nice, new, quiet,
>pollution-free dc motor.
>
>I have acquired a no-name 48-v series-wound dc motor with CW
>rotation and 2 external leads. When I apply voltage to the leads,
>the motor turns CW. When I reverse the polarity of the voltage, the
>motor still turns CW.
>
>Under normal circumstances this would not be a problem since I do
>not intend to drive the boat backwards very much. But from time to
>time, I will have to back out of my slip. So I need the motor to be
>able to turn CCW.
>
>If the motor had four leads (A1, A2, S1, S2) solving this problem
>would be simple. But as it only has 2 leads, I'm going to have to
>open the motor up to fix this - but I am not sure what I have to do.
>
>Can anyone give me (relatively detailed) advice on how to proceed? Thanks.
>
>Michael Bittle
--
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1059
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Originally they may have used different cells. They claimed 450 kg and
54 kWh. It can't be LiFePO4 since it does not have such high specific
energy.
Tesla pack comes up to 120 Wh/kg. => LiCoO or Li-Po
LiCo is 3,6 V/cell and Li-Po can be 3,7 V/cell.
Going Kokam way would have been easier so I believe they did not use
Li-Po. Othervice this would just have been inventing the wheel again.
So.. If LiCo...
6800 pcs (on their datasheet) and 375 V. Also (about) 54 kWh is mentioned.
By using 6825 pcs of 2200mAh 3,6V cells this could happen.
105 cells in string => 378 V
65 cells in paraller => 143 Ah
==> 54054 Wh ...
Close enough ?
-Jukka
Marcin Ciosek kirjoitti:
First - nominal voltage of Li-ion cells varies with chemistry:
LiMnO2 - 3.8V
Li-NCM or LiCoO3 - 3.7V
LiFP - 3.2V
I heard somewhere that Tesla is using LiFP cells.
On Thursday 05 July 2007 17:19:55 Joseph T. wrote:
The Tesla Roadster battery pack has 6,831 cells. The Tesla Roadster,
I've heard, is supposed to be 375 volts. Hmm...Lithium Ion batteries
are rated at 3.6 nominal voltage. So....3.6 volts times 6,831 cells
obviously doesn't equal 375 volts!!! What's going on here?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Pardon me Jukka,
what do you have in mind with Li-Po ? Polymer?
It has nothing to do with cells nominal voltage since polymer term is
referring to electrolyte used in battery (either it's polymer-gel electrolyte
or some manufacturers are calling the usage of polypropylene separator
as "polymer electrolyte" while it's is still mixture of organic solvent based
on EC/PC/EMC with LiPF6 salt).
Anyway, in that case they are using NCMs with different to standard
(1/3:1/3:1/3) proportion cathode oxides.
Marcin
On Thursday 05 July 2007 23:47:36 Jukka Järvinen wrote:
> Originally they may have used different cells. They claimed 450 kg and
> 54 kWh. It can't be LiFePO4 since it does not have such high specific
> energy.
>
> Tesla pack comes up to 120 Wh/kg. => LiCoO or Li-Po
>
> LiCo is 3,6 V/cell and Li-Po can be 3,7 V/cell.
>
> Going Kokam way would have been easier so I believe they did not use
> Li-Po. Othervice this would just have been inventing the wheel again.
>
> So.. If LiCo...
>
> 6800 pcs (on their datasheet) and 375 V. Also (about) 54 kWh is mentioned.
>
> By using 6825 pcs of 2200mAh 3,6V cells this could happen.
>
> 105 cells in string => 378 V
> 65 cells in paraller => 143 Ah
>
> ==> 54054 Wh ...
>
> Close enough ?
>
>
> -Jukka
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
before i endorse the pmg132, which i had been using
but just broke, i would like the get the following
clarifed:
is it possible to have 'overheated the motor' [that
was the offical statement of the makers in germany] if
the bike worked fine one day then the next day it
froze up after 20 feet of travel and not even reaching
a speed of 15mph?
--- Corry Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm doing a Kawasaki Ninja conversion.
>
> I'm looking at the Perm-132 or the ADC #A00-4009
>
> Right now I'm leaning towards the Perm.
>
> It seems like a more effiecient motor, and is much
> lighter than the ADC
>
> I'm not sure what how much the sep ex system will
> benefit me.
>
> Any feedback is appreciated
>
>
> Corry
>
Albuquerque, NM
http://geocities.com/hendersonmotorcycles/blog.html
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1000
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1179
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1221
http://geocities.com/solarcookingman
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The most important thing is to have a glider you will like. Sports
car, sedan, pickup, SUV, whatever. What rows your boat? Also get one
in good condition even if it costs more. An electric junker is no
better than a gas junker, but a lot more expensive.
On 7/5/07, TrotFox Greyfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So... if you've been paying attention I'm researching what type of
stuff to put in what type of glider to make my EV. Are there any
groups or events in the Knoxville, TN area that I might attend to talk
with some peoples about these things?
Camaraderie is always good. : ]
Trot, the gray, fox...
--
| /\_/\ TrotFox \ Always remember,
| ( o o ) AKA Landon Solomon \ "There is a
| >\_/< [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ third alternative."
--
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1059
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Marcin...
I was referring to cells which may be available in 18650 size. Most of
the cells labeled as "LiP" I've seen are 3,7V (did you notice the
"can"-word below ?). Such cells have specific energy of ~160Wh/kg and
would have been near the Tesla pack properties.
It may actually be a smart move for Tesla to move on LiFePo4 cells. They
will loose range but have stiffer pack. Possibly longer cyclic life too.
I was not thinkig of blazing on cell construction knowledge here.
You are pardoned. :)
-Jukka
p.s.- Not ALL LiMnO2 cells are 3,8 V as you suggested earlier.
p.p.s.- Can we cut this pissing contest here ? Othervice we are going to
quote the whole "hand book of battery" on the list.
Marcin Ciosek kirjoitti:
Pardon me Jukka,
what do you have in mind with Li-Po ? Polymer?
It has nothing to do with cells nominal voltage since polymer term is
referring to electrolyte used in battery (either it's polymer-gel electrolyte
or some manufacturers are calling the usage of polypropylene separator
as "polymer electrolyte" while it's is still mixture of organic solvent based
on EC/PC/EMC with LiPF6 salt).
Anyway, in that case they are using NCMs with different to standard
(1/3:1/3:1/3) proportion cathode oxides.
Marcin
On Thursday 05 July 2007 23:47:36 Jukka Järvinen wrote:
Originally they may have used different cells. They claimed 450 kg and
54 kWh. It can't be LiFePO4 since it does not have such high specific
energy.
Tesla pack comes up to 120 Wh/kg. => LiCoO or Li-Po
LiCo is 3,6 V/cell and Li-Po can be 3,7 V/cell.
Going Kokam way would have been easier so I believe they did not use
Li-Po. Othervice this would just have been inventing the wheel again.
So.. If LiCo...
6800 pcs (on their datasheet) and 375 V. Also (about) 54 kWh is mentioned.
By using 6825 pcs of 2200mAh 3,6V cells this could happen.
105 cells in string => 378 V
65 cells in paraller => 143 Ah
==> 54054 Wh ...
Close enough ?
-Jukka
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A guy's pmg132 on a bike in the Visforvoltage forum also broke quickly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "dale henderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: ADC Sep Ex or Perm-132 ?
before i endorse the pmg132, which i had been using
but just broke, i would like the get the following
clarifed:
is it possible to have 'overheated the motor' [that
was the offical statement of the makers in germany] if
the bike worked fine one day then the next day it
froze up after 20 feet of travel and not even reaching
a speed of 15mph?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
dale henderson wrote:
> is it possible to have 'overheated the motor' [that
> was the offical statement of the makers in germany] if
> the bike worked fine one day then the next day it
> froze up after 20 feet of travel and not even reaching
> a speed of 15mph?
In a word yes, although it is somewhat more likely that you may have
overheated the motor on the previous outing and bits that loosened/fell
of the armature didn't actually sieze the motor until jiggled a bit by
the start of the next trip. It is not impossible for you to have
overheated it in a such a short stint at low speeds, but unlikely, and
you'd probably know if the the conditions were such that you might have
been pushing significant current through the motor the whole time. (Such
as you were towing something uphill, etc.) ;^>
This is why I would personally recommend use of a more conventional
wound field (series or sep-ex) motor on a motorbike. Fixed gearing
means you will be at risk of overheating the motor at lower speeds on
inclines, etc. where you are relying on greater current/torque and
cannot ensure that the controller will limit current to a safe level
before the motor overheats.
I've had a Lynch/Lemco dissassemble itself due to overheating in an
Electrathon application (also fixed reduction gearing), probably for
very similar reasons as Paul Compton's E-Tek recently did on his twisty
track course. The motor was beautiful when operated at near constant
load within its limits, but when an inexperienced driver took the car
out and floored the throttle (~275A) coming out of each corner it only
took him a handful of laps to reduce the motor to an expensive pile of
scrap.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 7/5/07, Richard Acuti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'll start off with a grid-tie system but evenually I want an interrupt
breaker that will divert PV output from the static inverter to a "battery
bunker" I'm going to bury in the backyard. That way, if the grid goes down,
I'll have batteries to run things for a little while.
If you bury the batteries, will the earth soak up a percentage of your energy?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I also would like a quiet brake solution for my Fiero. Right now, I use
the GM vacuum pump, but
have also tried the one from Metric Mind
(http://www.metricmind.com/index1.htm). While the latter
is touted to be quiet, at least in my case it's noise was quite
comparable to the GM pump. I was
comparing the two pumps here when they were not mounted in the car.
I don't have lots of choices in where to mount the pump. Right now, it
is behind the front left fender
in front of the tire. This is a bad place, since there is only sheet
metal surrounding the pump. I have
attached sheets of vibration damping material which helps. I've also
tried encasing the pump in
different kinds of foam. Enough foam works pretty well, but it doesn't
fit in the space available
any more. Also, some vibration comes out the exhaust and vacuum tubes
which needs to be
dealt with.
A unassisted system would be nice in my opinion. The list has had
discussions from time to time
about removing the booster. I haven't had the nerve to try anything (yet?).
Ken
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Fiero conversions..?
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 11:01:48 -0700
From: Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
<div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">Have you tried it?
Is the pump quiet?
What I really want is to replace the master cylinder with on for manual
brakes, but I have no idea what I can replace it with, what little
research I've done hasn't helped.
Jack
I found a nice vacuum pump for power brakes:
http://store.summitracing.com/partdetail.asp?autofilter=1&part=SSB%2D28146&N=700+400336+4294821918+115&autoview=sku
$279.95 includes everything you need.
storm connors wrote:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---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 *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
</div>
--- End Message ---
