Hi Roland,

The best estimator for range on conversions that I have seen is a simple rule 
of thumb based on the original vehicle.

Figure that a lithium pack of 9 kWh is about the equivalent of 1 gallon of gas 
for the original vehicle.  If you could get 30 mpg in the original vehicle, you 
will get about 30 mile range from a 9 kWh pack.  Scale up according to actual 
pack size.

This has the advantage that it automatically takes into account vehicle 
characteristics, driving style, etc.  A 10 mpg Suburban will get 10 miles from 
a pack that a Honda Civic driven carefully might get 30 miles or more.

Mike 


On July 31, 2014 8:10:19 PM MDT, Roland via EV <[email protected]> wrote:
>I did this type of battery shunt test a little bit different over 50
>years ago when I working in a military battery shop.  I apply this
>method to every battery pack I had in my EV,s.  We use a amp meter
>instead of a volt meter.  We connect a amp meter shunting a mechanical
>fasten battery link to the two posts that the link was connecting to. 
>
>Making up a new battery pack, we first torque all the link connections
>to the same torque reading.  Turn on the battery charger and set it for
>a known ampere.  We check the amp reading of each link and find the
>highest ampere reading of one link.
>
>Then we re-torque all the other battery connections until the amp meter
>reads the same as the highest reading.   Run a load on the batteries
>with a load bank, or in a EV, just run the EV for about 5 miles.  Do
>the shunt test again which in my EV only takes less than 15 minutes. 
>It is normal to find one battery connection at about 5 inch lbs less
>than the initial torque of 75 in.lbs in my batteries.  
>
>I than apply a thick coating of petroleum jelly to the link connection
>all the way down to the battery surface.  The batteries are enclosed in
>a epoxy seal battery box that has incoming filter air drawn in with a
>acid proof exhaust fan.
>
>In about a month I will be getting three Nissen Leaf batteries which I
>will reconnect for 180 ah at 210V nominal. It is recommend to use the
>battery in the 3.65V - 4.15V per cell range. Do not charge over 4.2V
>per cell. 
>
>The pictures that they sent me looks like the battery links are copper
>which I assume the battery load terminals are copper too.  I am going
>to have to remove them so I can parallel three modules in parallel and
>series 81 of these parallel modules in series.   
>
>I was planning to buff the copper bars with my metal bench mount buffer
>with a new buffer wheel, because the other ones had compound infuse
>into for other metals. 
>
>After you polish or clean any links, it is best to wear throw away
>latex gloves, to keep the finger print oil off polish metal.  
>
>I will then apply the petroleum jelly over these bars and connections. 
>
>The weight of my EV which is now at 7020 lbs will weigh 5500 lbs which
>was about the original weight of the vehicle.  My 1st gear overall
>ratio is 25.7:1, 2nd gear is 17.6:1, 3rd gear is 10.0:1 and 4th gear is
>5.57:1.  At 7020 lbs, I normally use the third gear to accelerated up
>to either 25, 35, or 45 mph which is max speed in this town and 4th
>gear at speed drawing 75 to 125 battery amp and 200 to 300 motor while
>accelerating and 75 battery ampere or 200 motor ampere at 45 mph.
>
>I try the Uve Rick's EV Calculator and its way off on the Lithium
>battery with a EV weight of 5500 lbs.  The 1st gear range is listed as
>616 miles, the 2nd gear range is at 582 miles, the 3rd gear range is
>537 miles, and the 4th gear range is 495 miles.  I think if you delete
>the last digit in each number, it will be closed. 
>
>At one time we had a formula to give a estimate range or is there
>another range calculator that can be use?
>
>Roland     
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Lee Hart via EV<mailto:[email protected]> 
>  To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List<mailto:[email protected]> 
>  Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 12:48 PM
>  Subject: Re: [EVDL] Lithium battery setpoints...
>
>
>  Michael Ross wrote:
>  > In air, aluminum oxide forms nearly instantly. Therefore, sanding
>  > is a useless activity, if the goal is to remove aluminum oxide...
>
>You're right; aluminum oxide forms very quickly. However, the longer it
>
> is exposed to air, the thicker the insulating layer gets. So cleaning 
>the terminal to remove the oxide immediately before assembly minimizes 
>  the thickness, and thus *does* reduce the resistance.
>
>Very thin insulating layers behave strangely. First, the very thin
>oxide 
> layer is porous; it has lots of holes. Like spray painting something; 
>before you have enough paint to completely cover, you can still see the
>
>underlying surface through the holes. With enough contact pressure, the
>
>  metal can deform in to fill these holes to make contact anyway.
>
>Electrons can also "tunnel" across very small gaps even when there is
>an 
>  insulator in the way. The contact resistance doesn't go from 0 to 
>  infinite as soon as there is a tiny layer of some insulator; it 
>  gradually rises as the layer gets thicker.
>
>> I don't like the idea of sanding terminals.  You want then to have
>the
>> flat machined surface they have leaving the factory o get a good
>bolted
>  > joint with as much contact area as possible...
>
>What you think is a flat machined surface is actually a mountain range 
>under a microscope. Machining, sanding, polishing etc. just reduces the
>
>  scale of the mountains.
>
>  When the two surfaces touch, only the peaks actually make contact. 
>Increasing the contact pressure makes the metal deform, flattening the 
>peaks, and improving the contact area. The deformations also break any 
>oxide layer that may have formed, if it's thin enough and weak enough. 
>  (Aluminum oxide is a tough one, because it grows strong and thick).
>
>If you're bolting together steel, the contact pressures needed to
>deform 
>it are tremendous. But lead, copper, silver, gold, and aluminum are all
>
> very soft metals -- it takes a lot less contact pressure to make them 
>  deform to improve the contact.
>
>  > I suppose one might prove whether the resistance is changed for the
>  > better if you have a really good instrument to check it.  But this
>  > will not be your garden variety multi-meter.
>
>It's pretty easy to measure what's happening yourself. The test is not 
>  difficult. I would urge people to try it themselves. It's especially 
>  enlightening with hard-to-connect metals like aluminum.
>
>You need a digital multimeter with a millivolt scale (usually 200mv or 
> 400mv full-scale). And, you need a source of a known DC current of an 
>  amp or more. A 10-amp battery charger with a ammeter will do.
>
>Let's say you want to measure the resistance of the connections to a
>12v 
> battery: Run the battery down, so it will actually charge at 10 amps. 
> Connect the charger at a point somewhat away from the battery, so the 
>will be current is flowing in the wires and terminals you want to
>check. 
>Set your meter to its millivolt scale. Connect one lead to the post of 
>the battery itself. Connect the other lead to the terminal that
>connects 
>  to this post.
>
>Read the millivolt drop of the terminal, and the charging current from 
>  the charger. Use Ohm's law to calculate the resistance. For example:
>
>  R = V / I = 10 millivolts / 10 amps = 1 milliohm (0.001 ohms)
>
> Under normal circumstances, 0.001 ohm would be a good connection. But 
> it's a *bad* connection in an EV traction pack! At 100 amps, it would 
>  have a 1 volt drop, and so produce 100 watts of heat!
>
>Chinese lithiums I've tested straight from the factory are this bad,
>and 
>  sometimes worse!
>
>If you don't believe that cleaning, bolting, and contact "greases"
>help, 
>  try an experiment.
>
>  1. Get two pieces of aluminum that's been sitting around a long time.
>      Bolt them together. Measure the torque if you can; if not, use a
>      socket wrench and apply a "know" force.
>
>      Measure the resistance between them (as described above). Notice
>      that the tighter the bolt, the lower the resistance (to a point;
>      then it doesn't matter any more).
>
>  2. Take them apart. Clean the two surfaces with sandpaper, file,
>      wire wheel, etc. Clean off any resulting dust.
>
>      Bolt them together again, and measure the resistance again at
>      several different bolt torques. You will find that the resistance
>      is lower, at every bolt torque (though it still reaches a point
>      where more torque doesn't reduce resistance).
>
>  3. Add any kind of contact "grease". Noalox, axle grease, vaseline,
>      etc. Repeat the test. You will find no difference in resistance,
>      with or without the grease, no matter which one you use.
>
>      But... leave the bolted pieces of aluminum outdoors for a while,
>      where they will get hot/cold/wet/dirty etc. Without the grease,
>      the contact resistance will go up. With the grease, it will stay
>      about the same.
>
>This is a complex subject. I hope I have not oversimplified it too
>much. 
>  The experts already know it, and can ignore my analogies. But I hope 
>those with only a little knowledge may gain some understanding. And, I 
>  hope people will *measure it for themselves*. That's far better than 
>listening to experts debating how many electrons can dance on the head 
>  of a pin. :-)
>  -- 
>The definition of research: Shoot the arrow first, and paint the target
>  around where it lands. -- David Van Baak
>  --
>Lee Hart's EV projects are at
>http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm<http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm>
>  _______________________________________________
>UNSUBSCRIBE:
>http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub<http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub>
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org<http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org>
>For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA>)
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140731/05a8f629/attachment.htm>
>_______________________________________________
>UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply via email to