EV Digest 4777
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Newbie question.....
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Sidecar Rig
by Ken Trough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: battery explosion, terminal connections
by "Mark Grasser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Is it really okay to expose motor to the "elements"
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Wanted - information on DC motor
by Victor Reppeto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) article: E-Solex from Pininfarina
by Paul Wujek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Proof of concept/alternatives
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Blew up Diode bridge.
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: building from scratch
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: ThunderSky Self-Discharge
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) White Zombie 12.15 run
by Tim Brehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: ThunderSky Self-Discharge
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: White Zombie 12.15 run
by Tim Brehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Is it really okay to expose motor to the "elements"
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: White Zombie 12.15 run
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: building from scratch
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: building from scratch
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: building from scratch
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: Combining Fiberglass and Steel (was Re: Designing for safety)
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) RE: building from scratch
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Newbie question.....
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) RE: building from scratch
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Variac brushes
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Variac brushes
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
25) Re: Is it really okay to expose motor to the "elements"
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Paul Compton wrote:
Isn't is saying the same thing?
--
Victor
Of course not!
I should have re-phrased my question. If Efficiency % + losses% are
always 100% total (any efficiency loss is only contributed by losses
increase) than the statement is valid.
It was 40% efficient and we doubled the efficiency to 80%.
Agreed.
It was 40% efficient and we halved the losses, making the efficiency 70%.
You mean, the 40% efficient means - 60% losses, We halved losses
so they are 30% now (30% less). So efficiency is 40%+30%=70% now.
Agreed, but what I meant by "doubling eficiency" is you gain
as much (30%) as still needed to go to get to 100% (you need another
30%). So I instead of "doubling efficiency" should have said
gain efficiency to a half way to have it 100%.
My mistake.
It was 90% efficient and we doubled the efficiency to 180%. (Who do you
think you are, Tilley?)
No, Doubling 90% efficiency results in 95% efficiency precisely because
you halve the losses. It is not 90*2 math. In my definition it is going
*exactly half more* way to the 100% The half between 90% and 100% is
95%. By "doubling" I meant "going half way", sorry, mis-wording :-)
and I realze error in expressing "my" definition.
It was 90% efficient and we halved the losses, making the efficiency 95%.
In my mind this is exactly the same as one above. I think we both
understand the substance well. Thanks Paul.
Paul Compton
www.sciroccoev.co.uk
www.morini-mania.co.uk
www.compton.vispa.com/the_named
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Has anyone built a electric side car rig?
Vogel built an electric Harley with a biodiesel generator in the
sidecar.
Sorry, that should have been:
http://vogelbilt.com
-Ken Trough
Admin - V is for Voltage Magazine
http://visforvoltage.com
AIM - ktrough
FAX/voice message - 206-339-VOLT (8658)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You should be using large as possible bolts, BRASS ONES, and large copper
washers. Nothing less.
Mark Grasser
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 12:35:37 -0600, "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I don't know why Trojan is making battery post that way. My post was so
soft, that they mushroom or keep squeezing smaller. Not like the Exide
batteries I had before.
I seen these L post on a EV, where the owner had them nearly squeeze flat.
So make sure the post connection is a hard material.
The L post will might work if you used a square saddle washer where the
edges lip over the L post terminal edges to keep them from deforming.
Even that doesn't work. L terminal lead creep is the single worst
problem I've had with my GoBig scooter containing Hawkers. Tightening
the terminals is an every-other-week chore. I've installed cut-down
fender washers on both sides of each terminal to spread the load out
as much as possible and still the damn things squish out. The
combination of creep and the resulting heat leaves the cables actually
loose in some cases, free to move in all cases.
I think that the standard SAE battery posts are the best for high
current applications. That design has the largest cross-section of
metal and the largest surface area for the cable lug to mate against.
Crimped-on copper cable lugs have been absolutely trouble-free in my
Citi which fairly routinely pulls >300 amps from golf cart batteries.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Believe me forklift motors get no love. I mean red headed step child no love,
and even with that most of my rebuilds will last a distribution center years
many in freezer duty conditions with lots of condensation to deal with and they
do fine. Case in point, the yellow beast and it's twin that will be built for
FT sat out in my uncles field for ten years. It was a motor I no longer sold
and didn't want to haul thier 350 Lbs. buttes into the barn. Anyway when we
got the motors rescued and to the shop for John and FT they fired right up,
didnt sound real great but alot better than an ICE would, hehehe. Another fact
is there really was no rust damage to be found, but then again there was alot
of forklift grease glopped inside : ). Now Marko's Prestolite that he is using
right now has very bad rust attack on his brush springs. This is probably the
one area where the new springs being made now are not as coated as the good old
days. This is a 25 year old motor thats been i!
n his car
for at least 5 years now, if not 7.
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With many conversions, the motor is often located near the underside of
the car. I've read here that you shouldn't worry too much about the
motor, but is it really okay with getting wet/dirty? What happens when
you hit a big puddle, and have direct splash onto the motor?
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I would really like to meet someone like you who has already done this
and chat for say a week. :)
Ideally I would like a motor similar to the etek that can maintain 15kw
long enough to climb a couple of the hills around here. Then at some point I
could possible pull the brushes out and assemble a speedy-bl brushless
controller. I may be off base but this seems about as efficient as it gets on
a budget. Since I am trying to do this under $2k though, the e-volks kit looks
pretty good. Except the contact cotroller. My wife would not drive that. 48V
would give me acceptable range. 48v because I need to leave payload room for
Kids and groceries. If I knew where to buy 2 used eteks, or one larger pm
pancake motor and a controller I would love that. But I would have to get a
quote on a custom mating setup for the transaxle. Anybody got an idea what
that might cost? So for now I am just looking for used parts, motors, chargers
and the like. And putting them on a price list to see if I can get pwm
controlled beetle assembled w/charger for under $2k. I have not asked yet!
but I am fairly certain my brother-in-law will donate a glider, flywheel and clutch parts. On the off chance he says no I will just purchase a small station wagon glider. That will require more research though because I want the one with the most payload left after batteries are installed. Since this is a budget vehicle that means 8 220ah 6v trojans. Anyway, that shoud give you a pretty good idea of my criteria. Cheap, Lots of torque and easily do 50mph on 48v.
Victor R.
Salem, Oregon
Hey Victor your pretty close to me and in fact are probably not far off my weekly
motor run route, >as we come back over Santiam pass. What type of motor are
you looking to obtain?
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Redmond OR.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
An electric version of the old Solex moped (front-wheel friction drive):
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/09/e-solex_from_pi.php
--
Paul Wujek ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was wondering what makes vacuum pumps so "special"
http://www.shoplocal.com/shoplocal/Default.aspx?action=detailbroadreach&pretailerid=-99798&listingid=-2096537714
This unit has an inlet port, instead of drawing air thru motor. It is
tapped 1/4" pipe and they provide a plastic and foam filter for this
hole. I connected this to the vacuum booster hose and left the air side
open.
I put it in the 300ZEV using the vacum switch from a 300zx turbo without
a tank as a test.
It runs for 3 seconds and shuts off and does that every second brake
activation. It also runs 1/2 second every 8 so I realize that it is
missing a checkvalve between the pump and the system and leaking back
thru pump or there is another leak. Yes, this means I can hear it while
I drive. Perhaps a series resistor to slow it down will quiet it. This
is "72LPM" if someone finds a 30 LPM with an inlet port, let me know.
It is overkill in size, but I will always be able to turn on the key,
open a vacum valve to air to start it, then connect the hose provided to
pump up a tire :-) Dual Purpose!
I am thinking of mounting it under where the gas tank was and using the
remaining hard steal fuel line to bring the vacuum up to the engine
compartment.
We will see how long it survives.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 12:18 PM 29/09/05 -0700, Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
The variac's are facing each other. Oh O.........I did have to use the
opposite tap to get them to sync. Would that change the phase?
Hi Lawrence
Connections as follows?
Variac 1 Variac 2
Line 1-|---------|
@ @
@<-, @<---,
@ | @ |
@ | @ |
@ | @ |
| | | | _________
Line 2----)-----------)----, |Rectifier|
| | | | #1 |
| no volts | |_|AC +|--
| between | | | |DC
| <-these-> | | | |out
| wires ----)-|AC -|--
| at any | |_________|
| rotated |
| position | _________
| | |Rectifier|
| | | #2 |
| |_|AC +|--
| | |DC
| | |out
------------------|AC -|--
|_________|
With the variacs powered up, you should measure virtually no voltage (AC or
DC) between the following points:
a) Variac 1 wiper and variac 2 wiper
b) Rectifier 1 + and Rectifier 2 +
c) Rectifier 1 - and Rectifier 2 -
If you have this, then there is no reason that the two rectifier -ves could
not be connected together, and the two rectifier +ves. It would be sound
practice to fuse each of the wiper wires and after the rectifiers before
the joins.
Hope this helps
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 8:30 AM -0700 on 9/28/05, Don Cameron wrote:
If you read some of the chassis building books and websites suggested, you
will find that rear wheel drive is typically superior to front wheel drive
for acceleration.
This is certainly true of four-wheeled vehicles, but somewhat less so
with three-wheelers (at least tadpole ones). Remember that you only
have one wheel in the rear with that layout. Less rubber on the road
means less power can be transferred.
If you build a car without a transmission, you will be limited in your
acceleration and or top speed. See the archives, there are many discussions
on this in the past few months.
You are limited in top speed and acceleration by the gearing of a
transmission as well. The limitations are just different. If you use
a transmission, you have extra weight and lower efficiency. If you
use direct drive, you have higher amp-draw. There are trade-offs for
each.
--
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 ---
Thanks, Victor. By "strongest", I meant the cells with the highest
capacity. Or put another way, by "weakest" I mean the cells that would
cause me to not be able to drive any further, even though other cells in the
pack still had some Ah left in them.
I'm in the process of placing my cells in the battery box now, and though I
currently have no regen capability, I was thinking about the future and that
if I figured out a way to built in some limited regen capability, maybe I
could just regen to the weakest cells in the pack.
Right now, the cells have been sitting around for 9 months, so I wanted to
know if I could tell which had the least capacity. With that knowledge, I
had hoped that I could place these cells adjacent to each other, so that I
could regen to them easily.
For reference, after 9 months, the lowest voltage cell is 3.85V, and the
highest capacity cell is 4.08V. I think that the cells were fully charged
and equalized when I received them 9 months ago.
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Victor Tikhonov
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 11:16 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: ThunderSky Self-Discharge
Bill,
You can assume that "strongest" (lowest R_int) cells also
have lowest rate of self-discharge, but this is not strictly related.
Also, stiffer battery may have less capacity than softer one next to it,
so despite being stronger during discharge (less voltage sag) will
reach minimum voltage sooner.
Define your question berrer, what do you menan "strong"?:
Lowest R_int?
Highest capacity?
Lowest self-discharge rate?
Bill Dennis wrote:
> When ThunderSky cells have been self-discharging for a few months and are
at
> different voltages, can you tell which cells are the strongest and weakest
> based on which have discharged the most? If so, is it the weakest cells
> that discharge the fastest, or the strongest ones?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bill Dennis
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi everyone,
John wanted to let everyone know that the 12.15 sec. @ 106 MPH run is up
on www.Plasmaboyracing.com The rest of them will be up shortly. John is out of
town and is unable to send a post.There is some good shots of the car pulling
the front wheels of the ground on all the runs. The car pulled hard off the
line all night. Which is good since it wasn't heads up racing like we thought
it was going to be and they put us in the pro stock class. I felt very out of
place in the staging lanes with big block muscle cars with their 15 or 20" wide
drag slicks and wheelie bars. I don't know how many times I heard "Hey I think
your in the wrong lane".
Once we found out we were going to be bracket racing, which I have never
done or even really payed attention to, I thought we would be quickly
eliminated and just run time only runs all night, that never happened. I proved
to the pro stock guys that the little battery powered Datsun might just give
them a run for their money by taking second place in the pro stock
eliminations( I can blame John for not taking first place) On the last run John
changed my dial in time to 12.05 for fear of breaking out with the 12.11 I had
dialed in. The last run I ran a 12.151 @ 106.25mph which would have taken first
place. Oh well, second place isn't bad for our first time bracket racing. I
cant be too mad at him, after all it is his car and we both think if the track
would have given us time to get a full charge we might have even pulled into
the 11's. We were also unable to turn the ZILLA to the full 2000 series amps
due to laptop problems. John has the time slips in his vault so I'm !
sure he
will post with the times. All I can tell you is the car is finally cooperating
with me and getting faster. I think the next time we go to the track we can
expect high 11 sec. 1/4 mile times or break something!!!
Tim
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 09:25 PM 9/29/2005, Bill Dennis wrote:
Thanks, Victor. By "strongest", I meant the cells with the highest
capacity. Or put another way, by "weakest" I mean the cells that would
cause me to not be able to drive any further, even though other cells in the
pack still had some Ah left in them.
Umm, not a useful definition for TS cells. I have some that can put
out hi current, but have low AH. Some that have high AH, but only at
very low current. (like 7A or less)
Either of these would keep you from going any further.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I forgot I wanted to thank Rod for the play by play live updates as we made
every run and I look forward to seeing Maniac Mazda back on the track.
Tim
Tim Brehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi everyone,
John wanted to let everyone know that the 12.15 sec. @ 106 MPH run is up on
www.Plasmaboyracing.com The rest of them will be up shortly. John is out of
town and is unable to send a post.There is some good shots of the car pulling
the front wheels of the ground on all the runs. The car pulled hard off the
line all night. Which is good since it wasn't heads up racing like we thought
it was going to be and they put us in the pro stock class. I felt very out of
place in the staging lanes with big block muscle cars with their 15 or 20" wide
drag slicks and wheelie bars. I don't know how many times I heard "Hey I think
your in the wrong lane".
Once we found out we were going to be bracket racing, which I have never done
or even really payed attention to, I thought we would be quickly eliminated and
just run time only runs all night, that never happened. I proved to the pro
stock guys that the little battery powered Datsun might just give them a run
for their money by taking second place in the pro stock eliminations( I can
blame John for not taking first place) On the last run John changed my dial in
time to 12.05 for fear of breaking out with the 12.11 I had dialed in. The last
run I ran a 12.151 @ 106.25mph which would have taken first place. Oh well,
second place isn't bad for our first time bracket racing. I cant be too mad at
him, after all it is his car and we both think if the track would have given us
time to get a full charge we might have even pulled into the 11's. We were also
unable to turn the ZILLA to the full 2000 series amps due to laptop problems.
John has the time slips in his vault so I'm !
sure he
will post with the times. All I can tell you is the car is finally cooperating
with me and getting faster. I think the next time we go to the track we can
expect high 11 sec. 1/4 mile times or break something!!!
Tim
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't know if this is helpful or not, but next door to my friend's house,
workers are clearing out 30 years of machine shop crap. Among the items
being scrapped are some milling machines, with electric motors that look to
be about 20" in diameter. Like I said, they are planning on scrapping these
things. Location is Modesto CA.
David C. Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
"I live in the heavens. I reside on mountain tops. I am at constant vigil
over thee. I monitor thy righteous ways. Thy levels art mine to command.
When thou art in trouble, I will help thee through distorted times. When
thou art low, the touch of my hand shall raise thy spirit to the proper
level. When thou are too high, I shall terminate thee with a swift stroke of
my sword. When thy wires are frayed and broken, my angels shall use solder
and iron to heal thee. Thou art the circuit, I am the chosen one, I am the
TECH CONTROLLER!"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Is it really okay to expose motor to the "elements"
Believe me forklift motors get no love. I mean red headed step child no
love, and even with that most of my rebuilds will last a distribution
center years many in freezer duty conditions with lots of condensation to
deal with and they do fine. Case in point, the yellow beast and it's twin
that will be built for FT sat out in my uncles field for ten years. It
was a motor I no longer sold and didn't want to haul thier 350 Lbs. buttes
into the barn. Anyway when we got the motors rescued and to the shop for
John and FT they fired right up, didnt sound real great but alot better
than an ICE would, hehehe. Another fact is there really was no rust
damage to be found, but then again there was alot of forklift grease
glopped inside : ). Now Marko's Prestolite that he is using right now has
very bad rust attack on his brush springs. This is probably the one area
where the new springs being made now are not as coated as the good old
days. This is a 25 year old motor thats been i!
n his car
for at least 5 years now, if not 7.
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With many conversions, the motor is often located near the underside of
the car. I've read here that you shouldn't worry too much about the
motor, but is it really okay with getting wet/dirty? What happens when
you hit a big puddle, and have direct splash onto the motor?
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Tim
John came through today and paid me a visit. I got to show him Markos motor
and the shortened ADC 9 and gave him a DVD my neighbor made of the first PIR
run and Woodburn. He gave me the dvd you made for me, and well it looked like
you guys were doing okay amongst some pretty big dogs. Way cool for you to do
so well let alone the first time out. Thanks for thinking of me (DVD) as it
seemed everyone else got a call last night and I was left for scraps from Rod.
At least you two care. Well Tim was it worth all the work and waiting? I know
for me it was. The wheelies were a nice treat to see and I see your getting
better at the burn-offs, as I didn't see any sparks, hehehe.
As this season ends down I hope you two can find time to put Purple Phase back
on a main burner so we can see what the yellow beast can put out for you guys.
As to breaking into the 11s there is no doubt! As to breaking things lets
keep that away from my motor and the driver, everything else is fair game.
Even my wife became excited about the news and told her mom, and my
father-in-law called me tonight to say how cool it was about your taking 2nd at
PIR. Truly a very special night for you guys and it made me proud to have been
a part of this adventure.
Again many congrats on a great night of racing.
I forgot to ask John but I see you're doing alot of driving here lately. I'm
wondering if the Zombie might be getting a little to fast for the old man...
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Tim Brehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi everyone,
John wanted to let everyone know that the 12.15 sec. @ 106 MPH run is up on
www.Plasmaboyracing.com The rest of them will be up shortly. John is out of
town and is unable to send a post.There is some good shots of the car pulling
the front wheels of the ground on all the runs. The car pulled hard off the
line all night. Which is good since it wasn't heads up racing like we thought
it was going to be and they put us in the pro stock class. I felt very out of
place in the staging lanes with big block muscle cars with their 15 or 20" wide
drag slicks and wheelie bars. I don't know how many times I heard "Hey I think
your in the wrong lane".
Once we found out we were going to be bracket racing, which I have never done
or even really payed attention to, I thought we would be quickly eliminated and
just run time only runs all night, that never happened. I proved to the pro
stock guys that the little battery powered Datsun might just give them a run
for their money by taking second place in the pro stock eliminations( I can
blame John for not taking first place) On the last run John changed my dial in
time to 12.05 for fear of breaking out with the 12.11 I had dialed in. The last
run I ran a 12.151 @ 106.25mph which would have taken first place. Oh well,
second place isn't bad for our first time bracket racing. I cant be too mad at
him, after all it is his car and we both think if the track would have given us
time to get a full charge we might have even pulled into the 11's. We were also
unable to turn the ZILLA to the full 2000 series amps due to laptop problems.
John has the time slips in his vault so I'm !
sure he
will post with the times. All I can tell you is the car is finally cooperating
with me and getting faster. I think the next time we go to the track we can
expect high 11 sec. 1/4 mile times or break something!!!
Tim
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
-Real Genius said:
>>If you read some of the chassis building books and websites suggested,
>>you will find that rear wheel drive is typically superior to front
>>wheel drive for acceleration.
>This is certainly true of four-wheeled vehicles, but somewhat less so with
three-wheelers (at least tadpole ones). Remember that you >only have one
wheel in the rear with that layout. Less rubber on the road means less power
can be transferred.
a) The books are valuable for 4 wheelers and 3 wheelers. They should not
be ignored just because of building a three wheeler. Remember, half of the
car has two wheels! More info the better. As the reader becomes more
knowledgeable, they can make up their own mind as to what is valuable or
not.
b) do not forget weight transfer under acceleration. The contact patch is
important, but the other part of the friction equation is the amount of
weight on the contact patch. It may well be that RWD on 3-wheelers is less
effective than FWD, but what is needed is real live measurements to back up
the theory.
c) So what is better: FWD or RWD for 3-wheelers? Do you have measured data
to help understand this?
>>If you build a car without a transmission, you will be limited in your
>>acceleration and or top speed. See the archives, there are many
>>discussions on this in the past few months.
>You are limited in top speed and acceleration by the gearing of a
transmission as well. The limitations are just different. If you use >a
transmission, you have extra weight and lower efficiency. If you use direct
drive, you have higher amp-draw. There are
> trade-offs for each
What information do you have to back this up? Not only do I have a lot of
simulations (of 15 different motor/drive train combinations), but as well as
on road data. Removing the weight of the transmission and the
transmissional losses does not make up for better top end or great
acceleration. Take a close look at the torque curves of the common motors.
Run them through simulations. Try some experimental work. You will find if
you want quick acceleration and a high top speed, you will have to have a
transmission. Regaurdless of the extra weight or transmissional losses.
I am curious, with your EV what have you discovered? Is it 3 or 4 wheel? Is
it direct drive or do you have a transmission?
Victoria, BC, Canada
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Hurley
Sent: September 29, 2005 9:43 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: RE: building from scratch
At 8:30 AM -0700 on 9/28/05, Don Cameron wrote:
>If you read some of the chassis building books and websites suggested,
>you will find that rear wheel drive is typically superior to front
>wheel drive for acceleration.
This is certainly true of four-wheeled vehicles, but somewhat less so with
three-wheelers (at least tadpole ones). Remember that you only have one
wheel in the rear with that layout. Less rubber on the road means less power
can be transferred.
>If you build a car without a transmission, you will be limited in your
>acceleration and or top speed. See the archives, there are many
>discussions on this in the past few months.
You are limited in top speed and acceleration by the gearing of a
transmission as well. The limitations are just different. If you use a
transmission, you have extra weight and lower efficiency. If you use direct
drive, you have higher amp-draw. There are trade-offs for each.
--
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 ---
> At 8:30 AM -0700 on 9/28/05, Don Cameron wrote:
>
>>If you read some of the chassis building books and websites suggested,
>> you
>>will find that rear wheel drive is typically superior to front wheel
>> drive
>>for acceleration.
>
> This is certainly true of four-wheeled vehicles, but somewhat less so
> with three-wheelers (at least tadpole ones). Remember that you only
> have one wheel in the rear with that layout. Less rubber on the road
> means less power can be transferred.
>
True, but this is a good thing. Acceleration destabilizes tadpole
designs. Limiting the acceleration means that you limit the
destabilization.
Anyway, unless you're planning on drag racing it, it's not that big of a
deal, since even one wheel can provide plenty of acceleration for sprited
driving.
--
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 ---
>>You are limited in top speed and acceleration by the gearing of a
> transmission as well. The limitations are just different. If you use >a
> transmission, you have extra weight and lower efficiency. If you use
> direct
> drive, you have higher amp-draw. There are
>> trade-offs for each
>
> What information do you have to back this up? Not only do I have a lot of
> simulations (of 15 different motor/drive train combinations), but as well
> on road data. Removing the weight of the transmission and the
> transmissional losses does not make up for better top end or great
> acceleration. Take a close look at the torque curves of the common
> motors.
> Run them through simulations. Try some experimental work. You will find
> if you want quick acceleration and a high top speed, you will have to have
> a transmission. Regaurdless of the extra weight or transmissional losses.
Take a look at all of the top performers in NEDRA (electric drag racers).
Most of them run a fixed reduction ratio.
Some of these folks are hitting 150 mph in the 1/4 mile and doing it in
less than 10 seconds, using a fixed ratio.
It seems to me that they aren't having any problems with either
acceleration or top speed.
--
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 ---
> That is the CTE for the glass fibers themselves, not the composite with
> the
> resin. The CTE for the composite depends on fiber orientation, resin type
> and percentages of resin/glass, but is something like:
>
> CTE, linear 20°C 24 - 40 µm/m-°C 13.3 - 22.2 µin/in-°F Average =
> 32.1 µm/m-°C; Grade Count=4
>
> It is difficult to bond composites successfully to metals, and requires
> careful surface prep.
Hmm, how about if you put the metal tube in between layers? I.e two
layers on the outside of the cage and two on the inside. Or would you run
into problems with delamination around the tubes?
Lee suggested covering the metal in foam. Would a thing layer of closed
cell foam around the tube help?
Of course I could always just install the roll cage inside the body and
not have it as a structural support for the body. I could leave a couple
hairs worth of gap around the cage and then CTE wouldn't matter.
My only problem with this is that it's not as aesthetically pleasing.
However, I'm willing to sacrifice aesthetics if needed.
--
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 ---
At 10:31 PM -0700 on 9/29/05, Don Cameron wrote:
-Real Genius said:
Name's Michael Hurley. Real Genius is just the movie I quoted in my .sig.
b) do not forget weight transfer under acceleration. The contact patch is
important, but the other part of the friction equation is the amount of
weight on the contact patch. It may well be that RWD on 3-wheelers is less
effective than FWD, but what is needed is real live measurements to back up
the theory.
I'm not sure weight transfer has as much effect on RWD three-wheelers
since the weight balance is generally further forward. The
instantaneous Cg still travels backward and downward in the vector
opposing the direction of movement, but that removes less weight from
the front wheels than it would on a well-balanced four-wheeler. I
think.
c) So what is better: FWD or RWD for 3-wheelers? Do you have measured data
to help understand this?
No, I don't, and I'm not sure which is better. It probably depends on
what you're doing. I've heard from many three-wheeler guys that a RWD
tadpole will sometimes have problems on regular streets because the
middle of the lane (where your drive wheel is) is where car engines
leak oil and coolant and all kinds of slick crap. FWD would put your
drive where everyone else's is. In a straight drag situation with a
wide drag slick on the back, RWD is still probably best.
What information do you have to back this up? Not only do I have a lot of
simulations (of 15 different motor/drive train combinations), but as well as
on road data. Removing the weight of the transmission and the
transmissional losses does not make up for better top end or great
acceleration. Take a close look at the torque curves of the common motors.
Run them through simulations. Try some experimental work. You will find if
you want quick acceleration and a high top speed, you will have to have a
transmission. Regaurdless of the extra weight or transmissional losses.
For the same wattage, this is correct, but that doesn't mean you
can't get the same acceleration and top speed in a direct-drive
layout. You use higher motor amps in the low end. This does mean you
need batteries (or whatever) which can take the draw as well as other
components sized to deal with the same. That doesn't make it
impossible. Just more expensive.
--
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 ---
>> It was 90% efficient and we doubled the efficiency to 180%. (Who do you
>> think you are, Tilley?)
>
> No, Doubling 90% efficiency results in 95% efficiency precisely because
> you halve the losses.
Sorry Victor, but that's not correct.
Halving your losses is not the same as doubling your efficiency.
These are mathematic expressions.
Show me mathematically how 2 x .9 = .95
Doubling something means to multiply it by 2, or at least it does in the
english language.
--
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 ---
>>you want quick acceleration and a high top speed, you will have to have a
>>transmission. Regaurdless of the extra weight or transmissional losses.
>
> For the same wattage, this is correct,
Nope, that's not correct. If the wattage is the same then the
acceleartion is the same. Wattage = power and with the same vehicle,
starting at the same speed, with the same power you accelerate at the same
rate.
What makes the difference is Torque. For most (all?) motors amps =
torque. More amps = more torque.
Since you can't shift down with a fixed ratio drive, to get the same wheel
torque you need more motor amps. However, because the motor is turning
slower, these amps are occuring at a lower motor voltage than if you had
shifted down.
Net result is that the power stays the same. You just need a controller
that can throw bigger amps at the motor.
> but that doesn't mean you
> can't get the same acceleration and top speed in a direct-drive
> layout. You use higher motor amps in the low end. This does mean you
> need batteries (or whatever) which can take the draw as well as other
> components sized to deal with the same. That doesn't make it
> impossible. Just more expensive.
The batteries don't change. The reason they use high power batteries in
these setups is because the folks that use them tend to have heavy feet
and accelerate at higher rates than they would with weaker controllers.
--
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 ---
At 09:13 AM 29/09/05 -0700, Bob Boyd wrote:
Can anybody guide me to a place to buy a set of brushes for a Superior
Electric Company Powerstat variable transformer, type 1256, 240 volt, 28
amp? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Hi Bob
"Superior Electric Co" sounds like a Chinese/Asian brand. Any idea where it
is made? If you luck out there are specialized brush manufacturers' who can
make you one if you give them dimensions and application.
Hope this helps
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> >Can anybody guide me to a place to buy a set of brushes for a Superior
> >Electric Company Powerstat variable transformer, type 1256, 240 volt, 28
> >amp? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Hi Bob
>
> "Superior Electric Co" sounds like a Chinese/Asian brand. Any idea where it
> is made? If you luck out there are specialized brush manufacturers' who can
> make you one if you give them dimensions and application.
>
They're out of CT, and Powerstat is their trademark:
http://www.superiorelectric.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: Is it really okay to expose motor to the "elements"
> Eric Poulsen wrote:
> >
> > With many conversions, the motor is often located near the underside of
> > the car. I've read here that you shouldn't worry too much about the
> > motor, but is it really okay with getting wet/dirty? What happens when
> > you hit a big puddle, and have direct splash onto the motor?
> MOTOR!?!? Hell, the controller is the problem here. If you are running
anything becides a contacter, THEY work wet, controller you hafta protect
it from ANY water. EVen on super damp drippy CT weather was enough to put
the fire out on a Rapter and T Rex! Washing the car too enthusticly, loused
it up even, used a hair dryer to get it dried out dso it would work. Nothing
more depressing than a dead Squalid state controller after you have had a
contacter setup!That ya built and know how to troubleshoot.
I don't know if Otmar sealed anything up on Zillas, I hope so, because
most of my Stupid Stuff failures with DCP's stuff was water related.
Origional smoke is still in my Raptures, just they would die in their sleep,
nothing dramatic.
Motors, they run in weather extreame! RR motors flash over underwater.
Amtrak sez stay out of water over the rails, like more than 3 inches deep.
EVen though the motors have serious blowers to cool, threy are open frame.
water, like in the Titanic, can just flow in, giving you nice flashovers!
Hitting the flooded trak at 80mph, didn't KNOW it was flooded, scooped it
out of the way with the pilot(cowcatcher)was pretty picturesque, scary, as
you didn't know if the track was even THERE<g>!Ah! Magic Moments on the RR!
Motors were fine cruised into New Haven just fine.
Seeya
Bob, off to get the Sunrise this AM flatbed in tow!
--- End Message ---
