EV Digest 4768
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: battery explosion
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Siemens EV Motors
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Trying to fix Pack Ground and Russco Problem.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Composite monocoque vs. sand buggy
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Siemens EV Motors
by "Nick 'Sharkey' Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Saturn's Rollin... really this time!
by Victor Reppeto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Brake booster test
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: Can batteries be mounted up front ahead of the bumper?
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Sydney EV meeting
by "Claudio Natoli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Scratch Building a Car ( was RE: Can batteries be mounted up
front ahead of the bumper? )
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Capacitor Drag Racing Idea
by Tom Erekson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Trying to fix Pack Ground and Russco Problem.
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: World Solar Challenge......, question.
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Sydney EV meeting, Great!
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Which Nedra class?
by "Chris Brune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Vintage parts info wanted
by pete sias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Financing a conversion?
by Alan Batie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Trying to fix Pack Ground and Russco Problem and DC/DC issue
by "Chris Brune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Financing a conversion?
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: World Solar Challenge
by "Nick 'Sharkey' Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) have started ev
by "Tom Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Which Nedra class?
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Financing a conversion?
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) RE: EV Donor car available (Saturn)
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: Capacitor Drag Racing Idea
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: Financing a conversion?
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: Which Nedra class?
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: Adams, Lynn<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 3:52 PM
Subject: RE: battery explosion
I've now around 35,000 miles using the stud posts torqued to 100 lbs and
have not had any problems. I clean the terminals and retorque once a
month. After a month of use (2000 miles), the torque on the studs is
around 70 inch pounds.
Lynn
Hello Lynn,
I must of got a bad batch of terminal studs on my T-145's. The Trojan WEB
site said to torque these to from 95 to 105 In.Lbs. I started to torque them
in 10 In.Lbs increments starting at 50 In.Lbs. When I got up to 90 In.Lbs,
some of the studs bolt heads turned in the post.
There is only a 1/16 inch of lead that was above these hex heads on the
studs. I could pull most of them out by just pulling on the cable terminal
lug.
I call Trojan about this, and they told me this was the standard
configuration on these pad type studs. I was surprise when the tech told me
that this battery are not design for a street type electric vehicle using the
low profile pad type terminals!!
I had extra heavy higher post install on these batteries.
I had Exide batteries that had a larger stud type terminal that had a L-shape
head anchor deep into a very hard lead. I could torque these to 15 FT.LBS or
180 In.Lbs and had not trouble at all.
Roland
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of TiM M
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 10:14 AM
To: EV-List-Post
Subject: RE: battery explosion
Hey Joe,
Did the battery actually explode, or did you blow
a terminal off the top of the battery? This happened
to me on my truck. The batteries were old and hadn't
been properly cared for, they had "universal"
terminals on them and the interconnects weren't the
best. I knew all this when I bought it and was
planning on addressing all these problems. Well the
truck decided I was taking too long. I was pulling
about 300 amps from a stop when I heard a bang and
lost power. I coasted to a conveniently located
parking spot and took a look. One battery in the
middle of the pack had almost no post left. There was
a scorch mark on the top of the battery box and little
trails across the top of the rest of he batteries from
the little balls of molten lead bouncing around.
A dirty connection leads to resistance which
causes heating, which causes higher resistance, which
causes more heating... if it goes on long enough,
bang!
I found out the hard way, you need to keep your
battery connections clean and tight.
TiM
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com<http://mail.yahoo.com/>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Rewinding isn't expensive. What also makes Siemens motors
> expensive is integrating cooling tubes into the stator
> windings, make it all leak proof.
>
> Can you find me any industrial 60 hz liquid cooled motor
> small enough to be usable in an EV?
Why does it need to be liquid cooled? Sure, it's nice; but it also adds
a lot of expense. 99% of electric motors are not liquid cooled.
--
"One doesn't discover new lands without consenting to lose sight of the
shore for a very long time." -- Andre Gide
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have been bugged by mystery connections from the battery pack to the
chassis on every EV I have owned. I just don't get it. A completely new
pack with no motor hooked up or charger and still it happens. Lawrence
Rhodes
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Hastings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <EV@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 3:26 PM
Subject: Trying to fix Pack Ground and Russco Problem.
Problem 1) My GFCI tripped this weekend on the ruscco so I haven't driven
my truck since.
I think I tracked down my pack to frame grounding problem. There is one
battery which if measured from one post to the frame ground reads around
~5 volts and from the other post to the frame read -~1.5 volts.
I cleaned off the batts and charged again and it was fine for a while but
tripped sometime during the night.
I cleaned off the batteries again especially the one in question and it is
still reading voltage to the frame ground but it wavers by a 10th of a
volt after I clean it each time. It continues to get more positive or
negative when I go into the pack different directions so I am pretty sure
this is the battery. It is in a fiberglass box with a metal post nearby
but it isn't touching it and I have washed both thouroughly. Any ideas how
to clean it more or to get rid of this?
Problem 2) I think this was caused by the first issue. I have never had a
problem with a Russco and I have used them on and off over 4 years or so.
It seems to be charging fine but the light on top and the digital readout
died just after the GFCI trip. Is it safe to use the charger like this or
do I need to replace it?
Thanks,
Mark Hastings
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Shawn, Don and All,
Shawn Rutledge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've wondered about that too. Seems to me a tubular chassis would be
more rigid and pretty much impossible to just fracture the way a
composite monocoque would if it was hit hard.
That depends on many things. One thing many forget is the danger from
hitting the tubes of the frame/cage as I found out in the E woody crash. My
only injury from the compact car rearending me was my head hitting the rollbar.
lucky I had designed to to just be strong in the beam wise direction and my
head broke it loose for and aft lessening the injury. Had it been steel and
attached harder, I would have been hurt much worse. So don't have the tubes
where your body, head can hit them.
In my composite structures I'll use on my EV's, I now put the
composite rollcage between the skins so just a smooth, flat surface can be hit
spreading the load vs a small dia tube that will point load the injury.
And it's quite easy to build a composite body that is as strong or
even stronger, safer than a tube frame as if not, the F-1 racers would still
use tube frames as for them, money is no object but lightweight, strength,
safety is.
And the ability to include foam energy absorbers with deformable
sections of just the strength you need, is a great benefit to using composites
for more safety while using, paying for less weight assuming good design of
course.. and saves labor as the body is already built that you have to add to
the tube frame.
And the tubular frame
could begin to crush a little. The trouble with composites is they
are brittle. I imagine if you had a side impact, there is a chance
that broken rough edges could be shoved into the interior and that
would not be nice at all.
That is not nessasarily true as there are resins that are quite strong
and you can use a layer of kevlar cloth on the inside to prevent the unlikely
event of it happening by containing it and spreading the load thru out the skin.
Metal is not immune to breaching the interior as many deaths come from
metal crushing people.
But up to a certain threshold, it would
just bounce off the other vehicle and not be broken at all.
For side protection where there is little room, this is good and as a
lightweight vehicle, you only need to design to this strength which on them is
much less than a heavier car which also saves you weight.
I also use high door sills as it's rather hard to make a door safe from
side crash without one. And mine are quite easy to get into, out of dispite
it's height I've found..
The seats will be designed to move inward in a side crash with the
bucket seat high sides protecting the people inside. main restraint will be a 4
point seat belt harness.
With steel unibodies, the idea is for it to crush in a controlled way
in an accident, to absorb the impact. But either a tubular chassis or
composite monocoque is designed to be stronger than that, so you will
increase your chance of whiplash injury I think.
This is not ture as you can design any amount of strength you want for
vaiable crush space, especially good with foam. Metal tube is much harder as
you can't vary it's strength easily like you can composites.
At least a tubular frame could be so rigid that side impacts will
cause the vehicle to just bounce away. But then whiplash is a real
problem.
Especially if you whiplash into a tube !!
From Don,
If the monocoque is properly engineered it can be lighter, stronger and
safer than a well engineered tube frame or space frame. Almost all F1
formula cars use monocoques for this reason.
Very true.
However... good engineering is only good as the simulated crash
designs. If
only designed for a head on collision at 200kmh, it may not be able to
handle a 50kmh side impact. The same applies for the engineering of any
style of chassis.
Simulated crashes never happen. going out and actually studying crashed
vehicles gets better results. And you must take the whole car into
consideration as there is no way to tell where you wil be hit from.
And in0ovated design hat weighs little can make a big difference. On my
E woody rearender, I designed the rear wheel to take the first blow as the tire
is made to take this all day long, then as it was pished forward, the angle of
the traling arm forced the rear upward, allowing the car to slide under it
greatly lessening the orces and possibly saving my life. And that took on extra
weight, just using what was there in multiple ways. In a car the same
protection probably weight 3-500 lbs !!!
Good engineering requires good engineers (well trained) and good tools
(FEA,
etc.)
Sorry about that but no it doesn't !! While there are some great
engineers, many suck. Real life, something way to many of them ever experience
is much more important.
Actually building with different materials and subjecting them to
forces for many yrs trumps degrees many times as many schools squeeze every
last creative bone from them. all engineers should be required to build stuff
and repair it after using it before ever letting them design something !!
For instance I design a cool non dam hydro generating systen that runs
from river, tidal currents and was sucessful from my first one of many I built.
To this day I've seen probably 30 other designs that are so impractical it's
not funny as they will break, clog in a matter of days and none except some
sailboat designs using the taffrail log concept have worked in the real world.
For composites it also requires skilled fabricators and good
equipment (vacuum bagging, prepregs, autoclaves).
Skilled yes but the other stuff is really unnessasary. A good man with
a squeegee can do wonders at a much lower cost in time, materials, quality
control and labor.
The other stuff is just to justify their salaries usually though in
aircraft may be worth it. But notice those rudders, ect falling off airliners
may be from that stuff !!
Tube frames or space frames (there is a difference) are popular amongst
amateurs and practitioners as there are many rules of thumb available
(requiring less "engineering") and welding is easier than aerospace
composites.
Only for those with little experience and will not nessasarily be
better. Many amateures build composite airplanes, boats that are much safer
than a welded steel, steel tubed ones for the same weight.
It's just the way it's always been done in cars so they keep doing
it. But isn't that attitute what keeps EV's from being produced?
And I work in metal, composites, plastics and wood/epoxy. The forces
on a sailboat at 25mph or a powerboat at 100mph are much greater than a car's
are so we learn very fast what works.
So go for steel tube frames but you won't catch me doing that if I can
avoid it!!!
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
Don
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2005-09-27, Lee Hart wrote:
>
> Why does it need to be liquid cooled? Sure, it's nice; but it also adds
> a lot of expense. 99% of electric motors are not liquid cooled.
Another list introduced me to the German industrial motto:
"Why simple when complex works?".
On the other hand, it's likely to _keep_ working indefinitely.
There's a lot of nice things about watercooling in a vehicle,
amongst other things you're not blowing dirty, damp air into
components.
-----sharks (who rides a German air-cooled motorcycle)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the comments on your project. I need to sell an ICE car
before I start my project and notes like these are the best.
Victor R.
Salem, Or
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For those interested, running a vacuum booster(modified) on air works.
I turned up a plug with an oring on the actuator shaft and one on the
OD an installed it in the back where the filter usually is (near your foot)
I applied just enough air with a nozzle in a hole I made in the side
wall of the "power piston" then actuated the rod with one hand. and it
worked like a charm.
I won't be actually able to test more without a better way of
introducing the air, The power piston was plastic, like phenolic and I
cracked it drilling the air hole . but as a preliminary "proof of
concept" it worked surprisingly well.
At half stroke holding pressure, it was stable and didn't pass air.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 11:51 AM -0700 on 9/25/05, Don Cameron wrote:
I realize that Stu wants to build a three-wheeler. Polar moment of inertia
still applies. As well as a lot of other suspension and chassis design
principles that are in the books I mentioned.
To some degree they do, this is certain. But with a three-wheeler
there are certain considerations such as the forward Cg and the fact
that there isn't a rear outside wheel to counter roll under
acceleration and the like. Since the Cg of a stable three-wheeler is
much closer to the steering center than on a stable passenger
four-wheeler, you can have weight hanging out over the front and
maintain more stability and maneuverability than one might expect.
It is important for everyone who wants to scratch build a car, 3-wheeler, or
motorcycle to realize that they cannot simply start putting things together
without some understanding of why. At best the vehicle would turn out to be
poor handling, at worst, a very dangerous safety risk, to the driver and
others.
This is also very true, but studying nothing but four-wheeler vehicle
dynamics and then trying to build a three-wheeler can easily lead to
a very dangerous vehicle indeed.
I am not saying "don't do it". I am saying learn the basics first. There is
a lot of good information in books (such as the recommended texts), as well
as experienced, successful builders, and (to some extent) the internet.
Enjoy the dreaming, but when it comes to design and build, make sure to
back it up with sound engineering.
Agreed.
Micheal, I gather from your message that you have information regarding
3-wheel vehicles. Mind sharing it so we all can learn?
I don't know of any books on the subject, but Robert Riley has a
couple of good SAE papers online. Coupled with a good understanding
of two- and four-wheeler handling and suspension are handy.
http://www.rqriley.com/3-wheel.htm
http://www.rqriley.com/suspensn.htm
--
Auf wiedersehen!
______________________________________________________
"..Um..Something strange happened to me this morning."
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort
of Sun God robes on a pyramid with a thousand naked
women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
"..No."
"Why am I the only person that has that dream?"
-Real Genius
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dear listers and lurkers (particularly those in and around Sydney... Australia,
that is :-)
Doctor Michael Symons has organised a meeting for Sydney EVers, and has asked
me to pass the details on.
The meeting will be held at:
8pm Tue, October 4th
Party Room, McDonalds Bella Vista
6 Celebration Drive, Bella Vista
(in the Norwest Homemaker centre just off Old Windsor Rd; if using an older
map, it is at the corner of Lexington and Edgewater Drives, Bella Vista)
A number of EVers (and EVs!) will be in attendance. Please come along if you
can.
Cheers,
Claudio
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 12:53 PM -0700 on 9/25/05, Don Cameron wrote:
As Jerry points out, this is not a chassis building forum. Largely people on
this forum are converting cars, few are building them from the ground up.
There are other, more suitable forums for scratch built cars.
I can recommend the yahoo group vortex3wheeler, a scratch-built
three-wheeler group.
--
Auf wiedersehen!
______________________________________________________
"..Um..Something strange happened to me this morning."
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort
of Sun God robes on a pyramid with a thousand naked
women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
"..No."
"Why am I the only person that has that dream?"
-Real Genius
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ken Trough said:
But it is possible. The BYU EV-1 (an ultracap powered ride) set a record at
the DC event this year at 91mph and 14.080 seconds, and Victor's ultracap
powered Honda did a nice burnout at the Woodburn event. Maybe BYU got their
ultracaps donated, but I know Victor said he bought his surplus.
BYU's EV 1 racing team paid for the 260 Maxwell ultracaps that power the
car -- of course, Maxwell Technologies gave us a significant educational
discount -- we charge the pack to 400 v and, as I recall, at the end of
the run the pack is just below 300 v. We have the pack arranged with two
in parallel, and the two packs in series to achieve the 400 v starting
voltage -- our AC system senses under voltage at about 170 v and will not
run -- below about 250 volts the power really drops off -- we went to the
parallel/series pack to increase the ending voltage.
We are in the process of installing a new shaft in the differential (we
twisted off another 1" diameter shaft at the Power of DC) -- we have
changed the high gear ratio and hope to get our ET's into the 13's and to
join the NEDRA 100 MPH club soon.
Tom Erekson
BYU EV Racing Team Co-Advisor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
No matter how much you clean it, with the best battery cleaning compounds there
is, you will still get a very low reading of voltage from the battery pack in a
insulated box to the frame of the EV.
I get about 0.01 volt from the battery pack with all wires disconnected to the
battery. Connecting up one wire that goes to a relay that is control by the
ignition switch which turns on the indication to a voltmeter. This is cause by
the 180 volt battery pack voltage contacts in the relay flashing over some
carbon to the 12 volt negative on the coil.
The 12 volt negative is also ground to the frame of the vehicle.
Connecting up to a DC-DC converter and E-Meter circuits makes the voltage rise
more.
When you battery charger is plug in, but is turn off, The AC ground is then
grounded to the frame of the vehicle and the battery charger. My voltage goes
up to 1 to 1.5 volts.
Now when you turn on the battery charger, you will get the full charger voltage
from any one battery to the frame. The insulated battery box will reduce the
conductance from the batteries to the frame.
In testing the insulation of very high voltage cables with 15,000 volts passing
through it, the insulation which is a triple insulation, still has voltage
bleed thru it. The last layer on this cable is a ground shield that bleeds the
current away.
There is always some leakage in any insulation product. When a battery vents,
even if its seal, it will make a conductive path in the surrounding area. It
will go across the battery surface, the surface of the boxes, the surrounding
surfaces and so on.
I do not used a ground fault circuit breaker in my 250 vac 60 amp feed to the
battery charger. Just don't work on the batteries while they are being charge.
I monitor this conductive path with a volt meter with a 1 amp fuse and switch
that is install from any one of the batteries to the ground frame. Could use
LEDs to see a lighted indication.
When the charger is off, this circuits tend to bleed off and difference of
potential between the batteries and frame.
When voltage differences is less than 6 volts, than its safe to work on the
batteries.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Rhodes<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: EV@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:EV@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: Trying to fix Pack Ground and Russco Problem.
I have been bugged by mystery connections from the battery pack to the
chassis on every EV I have owned. I just don't get it. A completely new
pack with no motor hooked up or charger and still it happens. Lawrence
Rhodes
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Hastings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
To: <EV@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:EV@listproc.sjsu.edu>>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 3:26 PM
Subject: Trying to fix Pack Ground and Russco Problem.
> Problem 1) My GFCI tripped this weekend on the ruscco so I haven't driven
> my truck since.
> I think I tracked down my pack to frame grounding problem. There is one
> battery which if measured from one post to the frame ground reads around
> ~5 volts and from the other post to the frame read -~1.5 volts.
> I cleaned off the batts and charged again and it was fine for a while but
> tripped sometime during the night.
> I cleaned off the batteries again especially the one in question and it is
> still reading voltage to the frame ground but it wavers by a 10th of a
> volt after I clean it each time. It continues to get more positive or
> negative when I go into the pack different directions so I am pretty sure
> this is the battery. It is in a fiberglass box with a metal post nearby
> but it isn't touching it and I have washed both thouroughly. Any ideas how
> to clean it more or to get rid of this?
> Problem 2) I think this was caused by the first issue. I have never had a
> problem with a Russco and I have used them on and off over 4 years or so.
> It seems to be charging fine but the light on top and the digital readout
> died just after the GFCI trip. Is it safe to use the charger like this or
> do I need to replace it?
> Thanks,
> Mark Hastings
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: World Solar Challenge
> Hi EVerybody;
> BTW, don't underestimate the benefits of cooling the cells either. The
> power output is reduced significantly as they heat up. While cooling
> them is difficult to do well due to their construction, it is something
> to think about.
> OK..... WHYTHEHELL don't these guyz, cell makers tie in with the solar
HEATing folks and offer a heater and juice panel, Water would cool things
down a bit, right?and the juice would flow a bit better? What am I missing
here, 'cept the damn photovoltiacs are Unobtainium these daze, anyhow.
Seeya
Bob, still gridding along.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Claudio Natoli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:20 PM
Subject: Sydney EV meeting
>
> Dear listers and lurkers (particularly those in and around Sydney...
Australia, that is :-)
>
> Doctor Michael Symons has organised a meeting for Sydney EVers, and has
asked me to pass the details on.
>
> The meeting will be held at:
>
> 8pm Tue, October 4th
> Party Room, McDonalds Bella Vista
> 6 Celebration Drive, Bella Vista
> (in the Norwest Homemaker centre just off Old Windsor Rd; if using an
older map, it is at the corner of Lexington and Edgewater Drives, Bella
Vista)
>
> A number of EVers (and EVs!) will be in attendance. Please come along if
you can.
>
Sounds like fun, A EAA Chapter in OZ? More the merrier!
Seeya
Bob>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Now, for MP/x. This is actually where I need the most clarification. Is
the
> only requirement that it be a vehicle produced as an Electric Vehicle? How
> much modification is allowed? Does it have to be "street legal"?
>
The first year that I raced the GEM car it was a stock vehicle. So I raced
in SP/H.
The next year I wanted to make the vehicle go a bit faster. So I
reprogrammed the parameters in the motor controller to make it go faster,
and put some larger tires on it. My assumption was that this "altered" the
vehicle. So I ran in MP/H. I actually felt that even if I only changed the
motor controller parameters and not changed anything physically that it
would no longer be stock.
I didn't ask anyone if this was correct, but it seemed to be in the spirit
of the rules. If I had continued to race in SP/H I would have a much faster
speed and lower ET record.
HTH,
Chris Brune
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to the group,
I have acquired 2 pieces of vintage EV equipment that
were tucked away in a storage shed for years.
First is the Siemens motor, a big brute, with a number
of 1 GV1161-OZZ97-9ZU1-Z (Hope this is close, the
plate was hard to read.)
I was told it came out of a late 1970 or early 80 VW
and was probably a commercial EV product running on
108 volts. No controller was with it. Anyone have
specs on this motor or can point me to the source?
Googling turn up nothing on the number(s)
Second item is the Lester charger model #9865 rated at
108 volts. I see they still do chargers for golf
carts. Can it be adjusted for other voltages?
Thanks in advance,
Pete
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob Bath wrote:
With all due respect, be smart.
Insure it as an EV; actual cash value policy.
If Don had done so, the insurance papers would prove
the value, and the bank might be more inclined to lend
the market value.
I haven't made inquiries in that direction, but they didn't seem
inclined to discuss the matter... I did give them a link to, I think it
was zap's page, showing the current market value of the car. "we have
to go by the vin" seemed to be the end of it. I'm not looking so much
for alternative forms of financing, as to find out if there is anyone
who doesn't *require* an alternative form of financing...
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Connecting up to a DC-DC converter and E-Meter circuits makes the voltage
rise more.
>
I'm sure this is unrelated the exact problem that started this thread. But
anyways... Ralph Merwin recently had an issue with his vehicle that he is
getting on the road again. When he would turn on the PFC charger it would
blow the GFI. We went around and around a little trying to figure things
out. He finally figured out that the cause was the DC/DC converter that he
was using.
This converter was designed with all sorts of EMI filtering, it contains 20
x 220nF (4.4uF) of capacitance from the input lines to the chassis. If the
charger were isolated I don't think this would be a problem. But in an
non-isolated charger there is an AC voltage impressed on the pack positive
and negative relative to the chassis (ground). Thus a substantial current
flows through this capacitance to ground and trips the GFI.
He removed all the caps and now everything works fine.
So watchout for devices that may include Y-caps when using a non-isolated
charger.
Chris Brune
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It should've read "stated value policy".
Yeah, that whole area is a pain. Sounds like you'll
only get 1.5 - 2K for the loan, and have to pull the
rest from savings. Not fun.
What happens when you say, "It's for a Porsche, for
$9K," and have a VIN on it, then tell them, "Well it
wasn't as road-worthy as I thought, so I bought this
cool electric vehicle." Or has the check already been
made out to the selling party...?
Sorry, but I've always done savings purchase.
--- Alan Batie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob Bath wrote:
>
> > With all due respect, be smart.
> > Insure it as an EV; actual cash value policy.
> > If Don had done so, the insurance papers would
> prove
> > the value, and the bank might be more inclined to
> lend
> > the market value.
>
> I haven't made inquiries in that direction, but they
> didn't seem
> inclined to discuss the matter... I did give them a
> link to, I think it
> was zap's page, showing the current market value of
> the car. "we have
> to go by the vin" seemed to be the end of it. I'm
> not looking so much
> for alternative forms of financing, as to find out
> if there is anyone
> who doesn't *require* an alternative form of
> financing...
>
>
'92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD available)!
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2005-09-26, Myles Twete wrote:
>
> Probably not, but I ask this: why are so few EVers at all interested in
> integrating solar arrays into the bodies, or at least the roof, of their car
> conversions?
Because the money and weight would be better spent on batteries.
-----sharks
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have been reading the mail for a long time now. I have started my ev
conversion just a month ago now. I have been working with Bob Batson from EV
America out of New Hampshire and it has been a great experience. The manual
that he sends with his first order had alot of answers to the questions that I
see on this list.
It has been a joy to work with him and if any of you need help I would say it
would be worth a phone call to him.
Tom.
in Michigan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the input Chris,
I was just striving for clarification on the SC vs MC issue for when
decisions are made on how Dennis' truck is going to go together. From what I
can tell (for right now) if a vehicle is a conversion, is "street legal"
(current licence tag, registration etc in its state of origin) and runs DOT
tires, its SC. If it isn't "street legal" or runs non-DOT tires, its MC.
Once I looked at it on the NEDRA site, the MP/x question was really self
explanitory. All that is really required of an MP/x is that it was
originally produced as an electric vehicle. Other than that, anything goes.
FWD, RWD, AWD, increased voltage, different controller scheme, different
motor, multiple motors, extensive chassis modification, altered driver
location, etc. I am going to try and download the NEDRA addendums to the
NHRA rule book tonight to make sure that I am not missing something. In your
case, I think that voluntarily running MP/H is commendable but I am not sure
that what you did would really constitute "modifications", they seem more
like "tuning" to me. For instance, back when I first started drag racing,
NHRA had a whole set of guidlines for what you could and could not do if you
wanted to run in the stock classes but IIRC balancing, blueprinting, playing
around with tire sizes (within boundaries) were all legal. But I am not an
expert on these matters. I think you should seek clarification when you get
the chance, in your effort to be fair you might not be being fair to
yourself. Regards, David Chapman.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Brune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: Which Nedra class?
> > Now, for MP/x. This is actually where I need the most clarification. Is
> the
> > only requirement that it be a vehicle produced as an Electric Vehicle?
How
> > much modification is allowed? Does it have to be "street legal"?
> >
> The first year that I raced the GEM car it was a stock vehicle. So I
raced
> in SP/H.
>
> The next year I wanted to make the vehicle go a bit faster. So I
> reprogrammed the parameters in the motor controller to make it go faster,
> and put some larger tires on it. My assumption was that this "altered"
the
> vehicle. So I ran in MP/H. I actually felt that even if I only changed
the
> motor controller parameters and not changed anything physically that it
> would no longer be stock.
>
> I didn't ask anyone if this was correct, but it seemed to be in the spirit
> of the rules. If I had continued to race in SP/H I would have a much
faster
> speed and lower ET record.
>
> HTH,
> Chris Brune
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Alan,
If you figure out how to finance an EV for even a portion of its real value
please let me know. I would like to get a loan on my G-van to pay for new
batteries. I tried the "but it originally cost $ 67,000" trick with the bank
(even showed them the original receipts) but they would only look at it as a
`91 Chevy van, and besides it was more than 4 years old which made it
unloanable. David Chapman.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Batie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: Financing a conversion?
> Bob Bath wrote:
>
> > With all due respect, be smart.
> > Insure it as an EV; actual cash value policy.
> > If Don had done so, the insurance papers would prove
> > the value, and the bank might be more inclined to lend
> > the market value.
>
> I haven't made inquiries in that direction, but they didn't seem
> inclined to discuss the matter... I did give them a link to, I think it
> was zap's page, showing the current market value of the car. "we have
> to go by the vin" seemed to be the end of it. I'm not looking so much
> for alternative forms of financing, as to find out if there is anyone
> who doesn't *require* an alternative form of financing...
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's kind of the person to offer, but starting with a rusted glider is a tad
iffy
when you're planning on piling in another half-ton of lead to make it go.
Weakened body structure is not so healthy for an EV conversion.
In this case, it might be better for the owner to donate the car to a local
nonprofit organization.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I can't download it successfully, and I have a cable modem.
VirtualDub is a good freeware tool for DivX. It's not a really great
editor but it's the simplest most effective thing for cutting one clip
out of a video.
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/virtualdub/VirtualDub-1.6.10.zip?download
Danny
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
I need to edit it though, separating from other parts of the video,
(because it is ~110 MEG file and few minutes download for
even for a fat DSL or cable connection).
All this was taken as one long shot and I believe is
saved in DIVX (MPEG4) format. I don't have right tools to do
the split, and not an expert in video editing things, unless it is
very basic operation.
Have fun watching,
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:25:22 -0700, Alan Batie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So, I'm already to go buy Don's Solectria, having pre-qualified for a
>used car loan, and give the VIN to my credit union, and they go "that's
>a geo metro". Well, sorta, yeah. "We have to go by the vin." I.e.
>taking it at a value of $1-2K, not the $10-12K market value. As in, if
>I want a loan, it's treated as an unsecured personal loan.
>
>Is there any recommended loan vendor that will actually look at the
>market value of the vehicle in question?
Not a chance. No bank or finance company is going to make an
unsecured loan like that. The car has "market value" only to those
who are willing to overpay to get an electric car. If they have to
repo the car, they do not want to spend the time and effort seeking
out the one or two buyers in a city of such a specialty vehicle.
This is no different than trying to finance a radically customized gas
car. It might have value to you and the seller but to the bank it's
just a mutilated old car.
You'll run into the same problem trying to insure the car for what you
think it's worth. Your only option will be with a "stated value"
policy. Problem is, you're going to have a difficult time proving to
an insurance agent that the stated value of $10k or whatever for a Geo
Metro is reasonable regardless of the propulsion mode.
I had a similar problem when I put a $15k engine in my Datsun Z which
the book said was worth about $3k at the time. I did get a stated
value policy (and paid for it!) only after I proved the value with the
receipts for parts and outside labor and a journal of the hours I put
in building the engine.
If I might make an ever-so-humble suggestion, forget the debt. Save
your money and when you have enough, pay cash. That way the deal is
between you and the seller and you're not helping send a finance
company's owner's kids through college. If you don't get this one,
well, another one will come along when you have the cash.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Chapman said: "I think that voluntarily running MP/H is commendable
but I am not sure that what you did would really constitute "modifications",
they seem more like "tuning" to me. For instance, back when I first started
drag racing,
NHRA had a whole set of guidlines for what you could and could not do if you
wanted to run in the stock classes but IIRC balancing, blueprinting, playing
around with tire sizes (within boundaries) were all legal. But I am not an
expert on these matters. I think you should seek clarification when you get
the chance, in your effort to be fair you might not be being fair to
yourself. Regards, David Chapman."
I totally agree with David on this one and personally feel it would be just
tuning. Like I said before, I am not the final authority in this. It is only
my opinion. I do however commend Chris on believing he was doing what he
thought proper in the spirit of fair competition. So far in NEDRA everyone
has been great with regards to classifications.
Roderick Wilde
President NEDRA
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: Which Nedra class?
Thanks for the input Chris,
I was just striving for clarification on the SC vs MC issue for when
decisions are made on how Dennis' truck is going to go together. From what
I
can tell (for right now) if a vehicle is a conversion, is "street legal"
(current licence tag, registration etc in its state of origin) and runs
DOT
tires, its SC. If it isn't "street legal" or runs non-DOT tires, its MC.
Once I looked at it on the NEDRA site, the MP/x question was really self
explanitory. All that is really required of an MP/x is that it was
originally produced as an electric vehicle. Other than that, anything
goes.
FWD, RWD, AWD, increased voltage, different controller scheme, different
motor, multiple motors, extensive chassis modification, altered driver
location, etc. I am going to try and download the NEDRA addendums to the
NHRA rule book tonight to make sure that I am not missing something. In
your
case, I think that voluntarily running MP/H is commendable but I am not
sure
that what you did would really constitute "modifications", they seem more
like "tuning" to me. For instance, back when I first started drag racing,
NHRA had a whole set of guidlines for what you could and could not do if
you
wanted to run in the stock classes but IIRC balancing, blueprinting,
playing
around with tire sizes (within boundaries) were all legal. But I am not an
expert on these matters. I think you should seek clarification when you
get
the chance, in your effort to be fair you might not be being fair to
yourself. Regards, David Chapman.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Brune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: Which Nedra class?
> Now, for MP/x. This is actually where I need the most clarification. Is
the
> only requirement that it be a vehicle produced as an Electric Vehicle?
How
> much modification is allowed? Does it have to be "street legal"?
>
The first year that I raced the GEM car it was a stock vehicle. So I
raced
in SP/H.
The next year I wanted to make the vehicle go a bit faster. So I
reprogrammed the parameters in the motor controller to make it go faster,
and put some larger tires on it. My assumption was that this "altered"
the
vehicle. So I ran in MP/H. I actually felt that even if I only changed
the
motor controller parameters and not changed anything physically that it
would no longer be stock.
I didn't ask anyone if this was correct, but it seemed to be in the
spirit
of the rules. If I had continued to race in SP/H I would have a much
faster
speed and lower ET record.
HTH,
Chris Brune
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.7/112 - Release Date: 9/26/2005
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.7/112 - Release Date: 9/26/2005
--- End Message ---
