EV Digest 6468
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: contactor controllers (was RE: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker
Shock)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Warp, ADC, rehash, was Battery amps in Uve's EV Calculator
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Optima batteries
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Li-Ion Juice Maker
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) 14.4v 115 amp/hour Battery Juice
by "Patrick Andrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: contactor controllers (was RE: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker
Shock)
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Wow, What a difference 1 or 2 bad batteries makes
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: 14.4v 115 amp/hour Battery Juice
by Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: Wow, What a difference 1 or 2 bad batteries makes
by Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Fully sprung 'direct drive' (was: Regenerative suspension)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Optima batteries
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: [electric_vehicles_for_sale] (fwd) VECTRIX Demo Bike Now Available For
Te...
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Chassi - Pack isolation
by "Ted Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Contactor Controller
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Zilla wiring question
by David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: Chassi - Pack isolation
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Scrapping Noise - Update
by Peter Eckhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) EVLN(Rio Hybrid N America sales in '09)
by bruce parmenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Wow, What a difference 1 or 2 bad batteries makes
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Wow, What a difference 1 or 2 bad batteries makes
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
From: Jack Murray
> Doing a bunch of parallel and serial connections sounds like a lot
> of messy cables and interconnects.
Yes, it can be messy. Every circuit has this problem. Life is like that
sometimes. But it is manageable with foresight and planning.
> How about this idea, have resistors in series with full voltage, and use
> the contactors to by-pass them.
This is exactly what was done 100 years ago in trains and streetcars where they
had "unlimited" power from the overhead wires. But it is seriously inefficient
for an electric car where you have to get your power from batteries.
--
Lee Hart
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't mean to sound like I was netgain bashing, I
> wasn't. In truth, I think it is just the way the
> industry has gone.
Hey Jeff
Like everything else it's pros vs. cons and a need to
make a profit vs. what the market will bare. In
general I'd say these are good reliable reasonably
affordable motor choice for a large majority for those
doing a conversion.
> Netgain has those motors built and they have to
> work with what is offered. The only gripe I may of >
had was the Hype was more than the reality.
To me this is like the Ford vs. Chevy thing. IMO both
the Warp9 vs. the ADC9 are pretty closely competitive
on just about every front. Hype to one man is clever
marketing to another. I guess I'm saying when was the
last time you saw a comercial stating the products
weakness' LMAO!
> I have been mulling over how to upgrade my EV this
> summer and had 2
> senario's for you Jim, and wanted to get your
> thoughts. Might as well
> ask in the open for all to get the benifit.
Well lets see what we can do 8^)
> As this vehicle is heavy, I think my high amperage
> starts are wasteing
> large amounts on energy fighting the advance of the
> motor. I would like
> to play with an adjustable brush rigging. I think
> this condition exists
> because it certainly has a different curve than
> before and it comes to
> life at about 2000rpm. But this is seat of the pants
> stuff, so I need
> ABR to play with. :-) (I "need", ROTFL)
As we've discussed before I admit I set your advance a
tad higher than OEM but I did it being I felt you had
kind of a racers foot from what I'd read. Having
learned quite a bit since doing your motor I can
confirm that the current will be higher off the line
with advancement vs. nuetral. To reduce your
advancement just loosen the plate bolts and tap the
plate over and retighten them. I'd bet you could get
a degree or two if you'd like a little lower band.
When I had to redrill Bill Dube's spare motor I didn't
know what he'd set them at. We got a ball park area
and he said he'd adjust as needed as I stated above,
anyway just an idea for you to play with now.
As far as the variable advance, this is another
Wayland request which I created my first one (almost 2
years ago Wayland, lol) for his Yellow Beast Purple
Phase race truck I worked up from the 13" Allis
Chalmers motor. Anyway the thought is you start in
nuetral (more eff.) and advance as needed (keeps you
from melting stuff). Face it, everyone advances a set
amount but almost no one runs the same voltage, load,
motor RPM's, or current so I'm really, really hungry
for some data on these, alas no one's yet to complete
their project 8^( Yep lot's of hurry up to wait in
the motor aspect lmao!
> Concept 1
> Get a siamese 9 donateing my existing 9 to the
> mix. Drop it down in the tunnel. While this is
> easiest for me I requires all the contactors and a >
good way to move both ABR's hasn't come to me.
This is a problem actually. The distance is different
for advancement CWDE vs. CCWDE. Being on a Siamese
motor both halfs are running electrically backwards
you couldn't just brigde the two levers together.
Physicaly they also move oppisit directions. If you
were to just couple them together like Matt Graham's
motor setup then both of these issues are somewhat
resolved. If Wayland wanted to do this it could be
done with seperate servo motors but would probably
take some serious trial and error. You could just
drop out one motor and reverse just one which seems
the easiest to me.
> Concept 2
> This vehicle has an independent rear suspension.
> Drop it out and
> make a sub mounting plate that contains a gearbox
> with roller chain or
> belt and put these two motors side by side, behind
> the diffy in,
> ironically, the fuel tank area. Now the brush ends
> are side by side for
> easy rigging and the motors are closer to the
> powered wheels.
This would work pretty easy with a simple connection
rod between them.
> What do ya think? Can wee build a rigging that
> goes from -90 degrees
> (reverse) to +18degrees(full advance)? like a fwd
> and a reverse position
> and then an advance for the 18degrees. Then I only
> need the S/P contactors.
First off I don't think you'd need to get a full 90 to
get reverse. The polarity will shift over way before
that and become a retarted reverse (For PR we'll say
handycapped, maybe reverse challeged, lol), which
would be good enough for a reverse. Now you would
probably need more than what's allowed between the
windows of the comm plate for a lever there. I
believe a milled out slot around the face of the plate
would be the best choice where the lever would stick
out the face and slide through the 90 degree mill
slot. I wouldn't want to mill much passed the mount
holes though which are 90 degrees to prevent the plate
becoming weak but I think that would be enough to get
you what you "NEED" LOL!
Anyway this has been talked about before, I think it's
a doable project, Wayland and I talked about this when
he was addressing WZ's options for reverse.
Been fun rehashing it, hope this helps
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
____________________________________________________________________________________
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Oh Retro Tech...
Never have Us EV racers, Hydro plane or Drag racers ever had a cell from
Optima Short. And get warm. They get warm when you take a 1000 amps out of
them for sure.
I've blown battery posts off them
We've blown the interconnects out of them at 1800 amps
We've boiled, gassed, dropped, Shorted, Forgot overcharged.. Anything you
can do to them We have done in the name of Racing.
Nope never had a cell catch fire. Had moleten lead drip out...No fire....
So.. these are one of the safest batteries... even with your failure
photos.. something else caused the fire...
Like having a cell reverse... and then keep the Big amps flowing..
something that places many Kw onto a bad cell...
Orbs can be a bit better than Yts .
Nope the other way around. Orbs may make a few hundred more amps, But they
are quite a bit flakier to charge and keep in equalizaion.
I will be going back to Yts or on to Hawker. The Orbitals.. are just a pain
to keep on line.
NEVER would I consider a flooded in one of my Street machines again. The
gas, the mess the watering. Are not in my to do list on my EVs.
50 to 150 amp loads.. Snort!!! Try 800 to 1200 amps...
If you open or short a YTs with a 1 C rated load.. there was or is some
OTHER problem...
Lets keep the scare tactics down here.
Madman.. I am sure other EV racers will chime in here.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: Optima batteries
> The Larger Optima Batterys (D31) perform a little better overall than the
smaller ones. If you are considering an installation, put them somewhere
where they can be reached. They can perform well.
>
> BUT,
>
> occassionally, the spirals will short out, causing the batteries to
internally heat up and catch your vehicle on fire .... :-( Normally, this
sometimes occurs under high amperage loads, but can happen under normal
loads (50-150 amps).
>
> They are supposed to work under more harse environments, but, watch out.
>
> Try the exides if you can, the performance is a little lower, but the cost
is down quite a bit. If Floodies can work, probably a good bet.
>
> Peter
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Bro,
No that range estimate is the same as car manufacturers: to death.
I see about 1 Ah per mile regular driving and the 110Ah are spec'ed
to deliver 80Ah when discharged in one hour.
So, my safe range (50% DOD) is more in the 40 mile range.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of brougham Baker
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 12:42 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Li-Ion Juice Maker
From: "Cor van de Water" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <snip good info on pack
voltages>
> For example my truck (S10) has a 9,000 RPM redlined AC motor, powered
> by a 312V 110Ah battery pack via a 700V 250A capable 3-phase inverter.
> Using a manual gearbox locked in 2nd gear allows the truck to reach 72
> mph at the 9000 rev limit.
> I use this truck for daily commute and errands and it is in weekly use
> for being a truck with a long bed.
That is the sort of system that I am looking at. Similar drive system,
similar speed and range. The glider I intend to use probably has a lower
drag coeficient (at 0.31). I was hoping to get away with a pack about half
that (Ah)size in Lithium Ion.
Are your details on http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/694 still current?
Is the 80 mile range accurate?
Is that for 50% DoD?
Bro
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One of the posters suggested I configure a standard battery pack that will
retrofit in most EV's.
This battery would be 14.4v @ 115a/h the package would be 10" x 8" x 8"
weigh 12 lbs and cost around 1400$ +/- 400$. I haven't put together a
definite price and will try and to configure batteries for all of your
specific needs. Hope this will give you and idea of the size and price.
Cells are Sanyo UR18650F the spec can be found at:
http://sanyo.wslogic.com/pdf/pdfs/UR18650F.pdf
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Want a degree but can't afford to quit? Top school degrees online - in as
fast as 1 year
http://forms.nextag.com/goto.jsp?url=/serv/main/buyer/education.jsp?doSearch=n&tm=y&search=education_text_links_88_h288c&s=4079&p=5116
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you only use single-pole contactors then you need 9 to do a 3-voltage
contactor controller
(which gives up to 6 "gears" by adding a starting resistor as intermediate
gears)
If you add stout diodes, you can reduce the nr of contactors to 4, still all
single pole.
If you have access to multi-pole contactors then without diodes you can
reduce from 9 to 5 by using double pole contactors. If you have even more
complex contactors, you can reduce even further. I do not think it is
possible to reduce below 3 contactors (plus one for the starting resistor)
although theory says that a system with 4 states (off - 1st - 2nd - 3rd)
should be possible to control in 2 bits (2 contactors). I think the devil is
in the detail that each contactor is normally used to boost voltage 2x, so
engaging either contactor gives you the same intermediate state (2nd gear)
which means that two contactors are not sufficient, so it requires an
additional contactor to switch everything off/on.
With diodes and one double-pole contactor and 2 single pole contactors you
can build the 3-voltage controller.
Success,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 1:03 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: contactor controllers (was RE: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker
Shock)
From: Jack Murray
> Doing a bunch of parallel and serial connections sounds like a lot of
> messy cables and interconnects.
Yes, it can be messy. Every circuit has this problem. Life is like that
sometimes. But it is manageable with foresight and planning.
> How about this idea, have resistors in series with full voltage, and
> use the contactors to by-pass them.
This is exactly what was done 100 years ago in trains and streetcars where
they had "unlimited" power from the overhead wires. But it is seriously
inefficient for an electric car where you have to get your power from
batteries.
--
Lee Hart
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have been having issues with my range on my EV. Originaly it was
27miles to 80%DOD but when it got cold it dropped, soon it was down to
about 6 miles with less wh 7200wh vs 2800wh. (to the same low voltage of
240V during slow acceleration)
The voltage would sag terribly so I performed this test
charged everything then drove the 6 miles it was down 3kwh that day,
let it sit 1 hr then measured all the voltages. They were all 12.3ish
except for some lower.
I got a harbor freight tester and pulled 200Amps for 15 seconds and
had 2 drop below 10.5V and one that was close but it was dropping slowly
and the others were dropping like a rock.
A week later, I replaced the worst one, recharged, and went for the same
drive pulling 2.8kwh out.
When I measured the voltages I had a surprise, the second of the two was
down to 10.5V I waited an hour and it was back over 12. so measuring
right after the discharge looks to be a better indicator of problems
than waiting an hour.
Today I replaced that battery and took the same 2.8kwh drive. The pack
voltage barely dropped in comparison.
When I got home, I measured the voltages of several batteries and the
individual voltages didn't show the usual drop.
So, when a battery gets old an tired, does it somehow work the battery
next to it harder? These are not buddy pairs, just a 24 orbital string.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Patrick, looks good. I am happy you are doing this.
The costs look very similar to the costs of the Valence U24 batteries, but
this is at your most conservative price.
I am getting a different energy density. Here are my calcs:
55 cells to get 115 Ah by 4 cells to get 14.8V is 219 cells.
219 cells at 0.0465 kg is 10.18kg = 22.4lbs
This gives a gravimetric energy density of approx 162 Wh/kg which matches
close the spec of 167 Wh/kg
A few other questions:
1) as you stated in other email notes, will this include a BMS for
balancing, over charge and over discharge?
2) any idea of the number of life cycles to 80% DOD? The specs state 500,
is this what you think they will do?
3) any thought given to using the A123 batteries?
thanks for your work.
Don Cameron
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
---------------------------------------------------
See the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
Check the EVDL Archives: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archive
Check out the EV FAQ: www.evparts.com/faq
Check out the EV Photo Album: www.evalbum.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Andrews
Sent: February 24, 2007 1:30 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: 14.4v 115 amp/hour Battery Juice
One of the posters suggested I configure a standard battery pack that will
retrofit in most EV's.
This battery would be 14.4v @ 115a/h the package would be 10" x 8" x 8"
weigh 12 lbs and cost around 1400$ +/- 400$. I haven't put together a
definite price and will try and to configure batteries for all of your
specific needs. Hope this will give you and idea of the size and price.
Cells are Sanyo UR18650F the spec can be found at:
http://sanyo.wslogic.com/pdf/pdfs/UR18650F.pdf
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Want a degree but can't afford to quit? Top school degrees online - in as
fast as 1 year
http://forms.nextag.com/goto.jsp?url=/serv/main/buyer/education.jsp?doSearch
=n&tm=y&search=education_text_links_88_h288c&s=4079&p=5116
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jeff this is good news. I am going to do the same thing - I think one of my
pack of 26 is starting to drag the whole pack down. Did you do anything
specific for your test drive?
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
---------------------------------------------------
See the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
Check the EVDL Archives: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archive
Check out the EV FAQ: www.evparts.com/faq
Check out the EV Photo Album: www.evalbum.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeff Shanab
Sent: February 24, 2007 2:03 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Wow, What a difference 1 or 2 bad batteries makes
I have been having issues with my range on my EV. Originaly it was 27miles
to 80%DOD but when it got cold it dropped, soon it was down to about 6 miles
with less wh 7200wh vs 2800wh. (to the same low voltage of 240V during slow
acceleration)
The voltage would sag terribly so I performed this test
charged everything then drove the 6 miles it was down 3kwh that day, let
it sit 1 hr then measured all the voltages. They were all 12.3ish except for
some lower.
I got a harbor freight tester and pulled 200Amps for 15 seconds and had 2
drop below 10.5V and one that was close but it was dropping slowly and the
others were dropping like a rock.
A week later, I replaced the worst one, recharged, and went for the same
drive pulling 2.8kwh out.
When I measured the voltages I had a surprise, the second of the two was
down to 10.5V I waited an hour and it was back over 12. so measuring right
after the discharge looks to be a better indicator of problems than waiting
an hour.
Today I replaced that battery and took the same 2.8kwh drive. The pack
voltage barely dropped in comparison.
When I got home, I measured the voltages of several batteries and the
individual voltages didn't show the usual drop.
So, when a battery gets old an tired, does it somehow work the battery next
to it harder? These are not buddy pairs, just a 24 orbital string.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Jack Murray
> http://www.digitalbiker.com/bugwing.htm
> That is SO COOL! I've thought of narrowing a stock vehicle and
> dismissed it too much work for little gain, but this bug really looks
> good narrowed. No reason to make it 3-wheel though, could just
> as much make it 4-wheel.
Yes, it looks great. Have you seen Rick Woodbury's Tango EV? It's a 2-seat
4-wheel car that's only 3 feet wide! You'd think it would be tipsy, but with
half a ton of lead ballast (the batteries) located at the bottom, it's more
stable than most cars.
Wouldn't it be fun to narrow a VW bug, and *keep* all 4 wheels? :-) The type of
suspension the old bugs had might make this unusually easy.
--
Lee Hart
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I worked in plastics for almost 25 years. (I have moved on)
polypropylene (affectionately called polycandlewax) is the worst plastic
in a combustible situation. There are additives that can be added to
suppress the flame but they all give off a chemical fume that has to be
inhaled once to appreciate. The real problem is that PP can melt and
turn to a liquid and flow like water while burning with a nice clean
flame. It has been used for batteries because it is cheap and the acid
doesn't effect it. About 3500 plastics are added tothe plastics database
each year, surly there is something better.
Question. Since I am working on a lithium-ion AGM replacement design (no
worries, I work slow, no $) I would like the answer to this question:
Would you be willing to pay $2-$10 more per battery for the added safety?
I know this is partially based on the cost of the battery. I can't even
estimate as I am working on the design in the hopes that by the time I
am ready for the 144 cells, they will have dropped in price; dramatically.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 23 Feb 2007 at 20:41, Charles Whalen wrote:
> The other thing I am disappointed about is the big sticker-shock $11k price,
> which caused me to gasp and almost fall out of my chair when I first heard
> about it last summer.
Not to be too negative, but I have to say that over 40 years of watching the
EV business, I've seen a typical sequence of events occur again and again,
with only minor variations.
The EV builder starts out with the best of intentions - to create a capable
EV at a competitive (or even mass appeal) price. He develops a good first
prototype. He sends out some PR, places small ads in specialty magazines,
and (these days) puts up a website. He thus amasses a decent list of
interested potential purchasers. Based on that list and a fairly impressive
prototype, he rounds up a few investors. He rents a nice workshop and hires
a few technicians.
Now the project picks up speed. They're solving technical problems,
building more prototypes. They start taking these prototypes to EVents.
That's where you see one - perhaps at a Tour de Sol - and meet the creator.
He's smart, informed, enthusastic. He has a fine product and you can't wait
to buy one, especially since the price is only a little higher than an
equivalent ICEV.
A couple of years go by. The project is getting closer to production. But
now they're discovering hidden costs they never imagined, perhaps related to
legislative compliance and legal concerns. Instead of adding marginal costs
to an existing operation, as would be the case for an established automaker
or other corporation, they have to bring in new employees or consultants, or
purchase outside services, to handle them. And unlike Toyota or Honda, they
can't afford to swallow the extra costs for now, and recover them 5 to 7
years into production.
To satisfy their investors, they have to build these costs into the
projected list price, which doubles or even triples. When they start
contacting their potential buyers to let them know what the true purchase
price will be, the list suddenly shrinks.
Now their first year sales don't look so good. Their investors lose
interest or even threaten to take over the company. With no real source of
revenue, funding dries up. The company has to lay off most of the hired
techs, dispersing their knowledge and losing much of the project's forward
momentum. The owner sells off or parts out some of the earlier prototypes
(if they still exist) to raise cash.
Pretty soon the owner finds himself working alone in his workshop.
Eventually he can't pay the rent, so he moves operations back to his own
garage. Production looks farther away than ever. He grows disheartened.
Working on the EV isn't much fun any more, and other interests take over.
Things get quiet. The owner stops sending updates to the purchasers' list
and to the few remaining investors.
Remembering that prototype and the smart owner, you keep hoping something
will happen. You keep checking the website to see what's up, but now it
never changes. Soon the "what's new" section has 2-year-old news releases,
and the list of EVents at which the prototype has appeared ends with one
that took place 3 years ago.
A year or two more goes by. If you're still watching, you see the remaining
prototype and other bits auctioned off (these days it's usually on Ebay) as
the company quietly folds. If you're lucky, you're the high bidder and now
you have a sophisticated (but orphaned) EV.
Perhaps a year later, you try to visit the project's creator, the smart and
personable fellow you met 5 or 6 years ago at the Tour de Sol. But he
doesn't answer the door. There are no EVs anywhere to be seen, and there's
a 15 year old Chevy pickup parked in his driveway.
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not projecting this end for Vectrix, nor do I
claim that this is the inevitable end for any EV developer (though I've seen
similar things happen many times). Some lucky EV developers are
independently wealthy, and can carry on with their hobby for many years.
Even for those who aren't, these errors can be avoided.
I don't know what goes on at Vectrix. I certainly wish them the best. I'd
love to see them succeed.
But history shows that investing in an EV startup is risky. If I invested
in an EV company, I think I'd do so mainly as a "social good," not for
profit. I'd consider it a pleasant surprise if I ever got my principal
back, and a nice bonus if I ever made any real income from my investment.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please obtain my email address from
the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My apologies for such a long post!! I felt that it was needed to explain
the situation.
In late October I replaced the batteries in my EV with 18 US 2000 batteries
for a pack voltage of 108. I have numbered my batteries from 1 the negative
post of which connects to the negative terminal of the system and number 18
positive post connecting to the positive terminal of the system. On
December 28 I added two more US 2000 batteries to increase the pack to 120
volts. At this point battery number 1 was on the negative end of the pack
and battery number 20 was at the positive end of the pack. I also changed
the DC/DC converter to accommodate the extra voltage. I installed a regular
electrical box to make the connection between the pack and the DC/DC
converter. Prior to this the chassis and pack voltage was isolated except
when the charger was connected to the 120 volt AC source. When the charger
was connected to the AC source the chassis voltage was midway between the
charger output. I did not check to see if this was still true until mid
February.
On February l3 I decided to check to see if the chassis and the pack were
isolated. To my surprise I discovered that there was a potential exiting
between the pack and the chassis.
I had not driven the car for 13 days and the pack voltage was 126.8. The
negative terminal of the pack was 66.3 volts negative in relation to the
chassis. The positive terminal of the pack was 12.2 volts positive in
relation to the chassis. The potential spread was 78.5 volts. The
potential switched polarity in battery number 17. The negative post of
battery number 17 was 2.1 volts negative in relation to the chassis and the
positive post was 1.6 volts positive in relation to the chassis. I
completely disconnected the charger from the pack. The wires which connect
the charger were disconnected in the trunk of the car so they still run
below the body to the pack connections under the hood. This did not make
any difference. I unplugged the DC/DC from the pack. This did not make
difference. The 120 volt socket was still connected to the pack. I removed
the plug and found that it was taped with electrical tape where the wires
from the pack were connected. Also the wires were protected where they
entered the box.
Thirteen days later I checked these measurements again. The car had not
been driven. The total pack voltage was 125.8. The negative terminal of
the pack was 64.6 volts negative in relation to the chassis. The positive
terminal of the pack was 4.0 volts positive in relation to the chassis. The
potential spread was 68.6 volts. However, now the switch in polarity
occurred in battery number 19. The negative post of battery 19 is 0.6 volts
negative in relation to the chassis and the positive post is 1.5 volts
positive in relation to the chassis.
Since the total voltage of the pack has dropped only 1 volt in 13 days it
does not seem that this situation is causing a drain on the pack. All of
the cable have extra protection where they pass through metal.
I am looking for suggestions as to what has happened to cause a potential
between the pack and the chassis except when the charger is connected to the
AC source.
"Beano" 1981 Escort EV
Ted Sanders
_________________________________________________________________
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a month.
Intro*Terms
https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=4056&p=5117
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 03:09 PM 24/02/07 -0500, Tom wrote:
Here are the links via Tinyurl. <snip>
http://tinyurl.com/38k96q
http://tinyurl.com/2watvw
G'day Tom
All I get is a "document not found" message (same as when I cut+paste the
long links into the browser web address)
Regsrds
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes. I have done this and it works great. Just remember which lights you
used. You may want to put new graphic gels in front if you want to get fancy.
Since I did a fiero GT, it had gages and lights out the wazoo, so I just used
the existing 'check engine' and 'battery' lights. I set the Zilla to light the
battery light at a little above 1.75 volts per cell, so you know when you
should start to back off the amps. If you don't, then the zilla will do it for
you at the voltage you set. It serves as a good warning, and checking errors
using the check engine light is done just like an ICE car does it.
The zilla Tach output also attaches directly to the V6 fiero tach input line
and works with no fiddling, software changes (the zilla can be programmed to
change the tach output between standard V6 and 4 cyl. outputs), or secondary
circuitry. Only problem now is the speedometer, whose wiring I didn't touch,
doesn't work. Oh, well, there's always something. It isn't as of many people
around here use a speedometer anyway. They just treat the acellerator as a 1
step contactor controller (i.e. an on-off switch).
In short, I love my Zilla!
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: John O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 11:49:25 AM
Subject: Zilla wiring question
My Zilla manual recommends connecting the hairball to the check
engine and battery indicator warning lamps on the original instrument
panel.
So long as I remember what the meaning is I can make the connection
to any of the warning lamps I choose correct?
(another one of those stupid question I come up with that I spend way
too much time worrying about)
John
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Ted,
Thanks for the well documented post.
My first impression is that you use flooded batteries, which must gas during
charging to mix the electrolyte.
This gas also releases tiny droplets which settle on the top of each battery
and cause it to become slightly conductive.
Clean the tops of all batteries and most likely everything is back to
normal.
Success,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ted Sanders
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 2:35 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Chassi - Pack isolation
My apologies for such a long post!! I felt that it was needed to explain
the situation.
In late October I replaced the batteries in my EV with 18 US 2000 batteries
for a pack voltage of 108. I have numbered my batteries from 1 the negative
post of which connects to the negative terminal of the system and number 18
positive post connecting to the positive terminal of the system. On
December 28 I added two more US 2000 batteries to increase the pack to 120
volts. At this point battery number 1 was on the negative end of the pack
and battery number 20 was at the positive end of the pack. I also changed
the DC/DC converter to accommodate the extra voltage. I installed a regular
electrical box to make the connection between the pack and the DC/DC
converter. Prior to this the chassis and pack voltage was isolated except
when the charger was connected to the 120 volt AC source. When the charger
was connected to the AC source the chassis voltage was midway between the
charger output. I did not check to see if this was still true until mid
February.
On February l3 I decided to check to see if the chassis and the pack were
isolated. To my surprise I discovered that there was a potential exiting
between the pack and the chassis.
I had not driven the car for 13 days and the pack voltage was 126.8. The
negative terminal of the pack was 66.3 volts negative in relation to the
chassis. The positive terminal of the pack was 12.2 volts positive in
relation to the chassis. The potential spread was 78.5 volts. The
potential switched polarity in battery number 17. The negative post of
battery number 17 was 2.1 volts negative in relation to the chassis and the
positive post was 1.6 volts positive in relation to the chassis. I
completely disconnected the charger from the pack. The wires which connect
the charger were disconnected in the trunk of the car so they still run
below the body to the pack connections under the hood. This did not make
any difference. I unplugged the DC/DC from the pack. This did not make
difference. The 120 volt socket was still connected to the pack. I removed
the plug and found that it was taped with electrical tape where the wires
from the pack were connected. Also the wires were protected where they
entered the box.
Thirteen days later I checked these measurements again. The car had not
been driven. The total pack voltage was 125.8. The negative terminal of
the pack was 64.6 volts negative in relation to the chassis. The positive
terminal of the pack was 4.0 volts positive in relation to the chassis. The
potential spread was 68.6 volts. However, now the switch in polarity
occurred in battery number 19. The negative post of battery 19 is 0.6 volts
negative in relation to the chassis and the positive post is 1.5 volts
positive in relation to the chassis.
Since the total voltage of the pack has dropped only 1 volt in 13 days it
does not seem that this situation is causing a drain on the pack. All of
the cable have extra protection where they pass through metal.
I am looking for suggestions as to what has happened to cause a potential
between the pack and the chassis except when the charger is connected to the
AC source.
"Beano" 1981 Escort EV
Ted Sanders
_________________________________________________________________
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a month.
Intro*Terms
https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search
=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=4056&p=5117
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello All,
While we were under the car and following your suggestions, we removed a
stick that was stuck in a wishbone piece of formed steel that attaches
the rear wheel which is part of a McPherson strut assembly. The stick
was rubbing between the rear rotor and rim on the spokes.
We removed the stick and all was quiet. We did get the brushes replaced.
Peter
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
EVLN(Rio Hybrid N America sales in '09)
[The Internet Electric Vehicle List News. For Public EV
informational purposes. Contact publication for reprint rights.]
--- {EVangel}
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=119701
2007 Geneva Auto Show Preview: Kia Rio Hybrid
Date posted: 02-22-2007
[
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//media/il/news/2007/0222/kia.rio.500.jpg
Kia will introduce the Rio Hybrid at the Geneva Motor Show. The
company is also planning to test the hybrid vehicle on Korean
roads in a 4,000-car test project. It's not expected in the U.S.
until at least 2008. Pictured is the gasoline-engine version of
the Rio. (Photo courtesy of Kia Motors America)]
SEOUL, S. Korea Kia Motors has announced that it will unveil
the Rio Hybrid concept at the upcoming Geneva auto show.
The brand's first-ever gas-electric hybrid, developed in
conjunction with Korean parent company Hyundai, employs a
90-horsepower 1.4-liter four-cylinder gas engine mated to a
compact 12-kilowatt electric motor.
Kia said it is working with the Korean Ministry of the
Environment on an ambitious R&D exercise that will see nearly
4,000 Rio Hybrids on local roads as part of the company's "real
world" test program.
Kia previously had hinted that it planned to begin selling the
Rio Hybrid in North America in 2007, but those plans have been
stalled until 2008-'09, according to media reports from Korea.
What this means to you: The Koreans are late to the hybrid party
but then, so are the Europeans.
© 1995-2007 Edmunds.com, Inc.
-
Bruce {EVangel} Parmenter
' ____
~/__|o\__
'@----- @'---(=
. http://geocities.com/brucedp/
. EV List Editor, RE & AFV newswires
. (originator of the above ASCII art)
===== Undo Petroleum Everywhere
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just as I said under the NiMH subject, if you have 1500 cells, the
chance of one going bad is very likely, but it won't cripple the car
becaues there is a lot of redundancy. With a single string of 20
batteries, if one goes bad.. so while you MUST have monitoring with
1500 cells, you need it also with just the 20 lead-acids.
Jack
Jeff Shanab wrote:
I have been having issues with my range on my EV. Originaly it was
27miles to 80%DOD but when it got cold it dropped, soon it was down to
about 6 miles with less wh 7200wh vs 2800wh. (to the same low voltage of
240V during slow acceleration)
The voltage would sag terribly so I performed this test
charged everything then drove the 6 miles it was down 3kwh that day,
let it sit 1 hr then measured all the voltages. They were all 12.3ish
except for some lower.
I got a harbor freight tester and pulled 200Amps for 15 seconds and
had 2 drop below 10.5V and one that was close but it was dropping slowly
and the others were dropping like a rock.
A week later, I replaced the worst one, recharged, and went for the same
drive pulling 2.8kwh out.
When I measured the voltages I had a surprise, the second of the two was
down to 10.5V I waited an hour and it was back over 12. so measuring
right after the discharge looks to be a better indicator of problems
than waiting an hour.
Today I replaced that battery and took the same 2.8kwh drive. The pack
voltage barely dropped in comparison.
When I got home, I measured the voltages of several batteries and the
individual voltages didn't show the usual drop.
So, when a battery gets old an tired, does it somehow work the battery
next to it harder? These are not buddy pairs, just a 24 orbital string.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Jeff and All,
If your batts were at the edge of the pack
they might have been at different temps, cooler than the
others which can quickly unbalance them leading to cell
reversal if not caught.
Now in the summer the opposite happens where
the inner batts become too hot and unbalance because of it
and vent.
Catch it early and you can just recharge it,
equalize and insulate equally.
In lead batt it's important to keep them all
at about the same temp, not more than 10F and perferably
within 5F or their charging, discharging, resistance,
profiles become very different.
I'm putting mine in the same insulated place
with temp controlled fan cooling when needed to a good
reasonable temp winter or summer.
Jerry Dycus
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Subject: Wow, What a difference 1 or 2 bad batteries makes
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:03:11 -0800
>I have been having issues with my range on my EV. Originaly
>it was 27miles to 80%DOD but when it got cold it dropped,
>soon it was down to about 6 miles with less wh 7200wh vs
>2800wh. (to the same low voltage of 240V during slow
>acceleration)
>
>The voltage would sag terribly so I performed this test
> charged everything then drove the 6 miles it was down
>3kwh that day, let it sit 1 hr then measured all the
>voltages. They were all 12.3ish except for some lower.
> I got a harbor freight tester and pulled 200Amps for 15
>seconds and had 2 drop below 10.5V and one that was close
>but it was dropping slowly and the others were dropping
>like a rock.
>
>A week later, I replaced the worst one, recharged, and went
>for the same drive pulling 2.8kwh out.
>When I measured the voltages I had a surprise, the second
>of the two was down to 10.5V I waited an hour and it was
>back over 12. so measuring right after the discharge looks
>to be a better indicator of problems than waiting an hour.
>
>Today I replaced that battery and took the same 2.8kwh
>drive. The pack voltage barely dropped in comparison.
>When I got home, I measured the voltages of several
>batteries and the individual voltages didn't show the usual
>drop.
>
>So, when a battery gets old an tired, does it somehow work
>the battery next to it harder? These are not buddy pairs,
>just a 24 orbital string.
>
--- End Message ---
