Re: [EVDL] Another recommendation for a drive way protection circuit....

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

Ok great I’ll have to polish my glasses. It looked like a female receptical 
when it watched it. Good to know.  

Lawrence

> On Jan 9, 2018, at 20:42, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
> 
> I have never understood why the NEC _requires_ an EV charging plug be 
> "locking".
> It makes no sense.
> 
> If you drive away (or the vehicle somehow rolls, is towed, or moves away) the 
> plug should simply come out.
> 
> As it is now, the locking plug won't give, so the cord breaks, or worse, the 
> charger rips from the wall, damaging the fixed wiring.
> 
> The plug should not be _required_ to lock into place. It would be far safer 
> to simply have the plug come out when the vehicle moves and the cord is 
> strained.
> 
> Bill D.
> 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Cheap L2 charging in parking places: Bolt EV'sIn Production

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

Chances are it was jury rigged and had no breakers protecting the line. It's 
common in India to string wiring every which way from wherever there is an 
existing power point. It's a wonder there aren't more house fires.   I think 
what the article was saying is there should have been a dedicated circuit for 
charging.  Not really misusing a nema plug but bad wiring and missing or 
incorrect safety systems. 

Lawrence

> On Nov 11, 2016, at 07:38, ROBERT via EV  wrote:
> 
> I guess concern about people misusing public NEMA receptacles does have some 
> merit or a least in India.
> 
> http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/e-Rickshaw-charging-requires-a-separate-AC-power-line-gt-3killed-amp-14injured-by-Delhi-in-fire-td4684414.html
> 
> Electric Vehicle Discussion List - e-Rickshaw charging requires a separate AC 
> power line> 3killed&14injured by Delhi.in 
> fire
> electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com
> e-Rickshaw charging requires a separate AC power line> 3killed&14injured by 
> Delhi.in fire. 
> http://www.nyoooz.com/delhi/651683/three-killed-14-injured-as-fire-breaks-out-in-shahdara-building
>  ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: ROBERT 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 4:56 PM
> To: ROBERT; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Cheap L2 charging in parking places: Bolt EV'sIn 
> Production
> 
> 
> Again I must correct myself.  I looked back at the J1772 standard and some 
> past work that I did.  An EVSE outputs a 1KHz square wave.  The duty cycle of 
> this wave informs the the vehicle of the maximum amperage that the EVSE can 
> supply (rated current).  The vehicle is responsible for not drawings a 
> current greater than the EVSE rating.  All lower amperage adapters must limit 
> this duty cycle to the rating of the adapter.  As an example.  If the EVSE is 
> rated at 50 amps and the adapter is only rated for 20A, the adapter must 
> adjust the duty cycle.  It is possible to design a 20A adapter with a switch 
> and a resistor that does not modify the duty cycle from the EVSE.  This would 
> be an unsafe adapter design.  These type adapter do exist.  You are correct 
> in stating that no car manufacturer would use this type of design.
> 
> 
> As happens many times, the discussion in a forum can get side tracked.  The 
> original discussion (I had to look at previous emails) was concerning a large 
> NEMA plug system vs a large EVSE system for a parking area.  I commented that 
> a NEMA system would works; however, it had some issues.  One of the issues 
> was unsafe adapters usage and another was how does a vehicle with a J1772 
> connector know the rating of the NEMA plug.  I still stand by these two 
> issues.  Unsafe adapters do exist and there is no way of preventing a person 
> from using one in an un-monitored parking area. In addition, the vehicle 
> cannot know the rating of the NEMA receptacle.  The adapter can tell the 
> vehicle the rating of the adapter but not the rating of the NEMA receptacle.
> 
> 
> From: EV  on behalf of ROBERT via EV 
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 2:24 PM
> To: Roger Stockton; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Cheap L2 charging in parking places: Bolt EV'sIn 
> Production
> 
> How many of these adapters are approved by the vehicle manufacturer and how 
> many are UL listed?  In addition, how many of these adapters come with a list 
> of vehicles for which they have been tested and certificated by the UL or the 
> manufacturer?  In addition, I know of companies that are selling adapters 
> that do not issue a pilot signal (square wave).  The adapters only have a 
> switch that show that a vehicle is connected.  I guess I should not have 
> stated "they are not safe to use".  I should have stated that these adapters 
> have not been shown to be as safe as the J1772 connectors installed by the 
> vehicle manufacturers.
> 
> 
> Some car manufacturers like Tesla sell adapters. However, these adapters 
> should not be used with other vehicles.
> 
> 
> 
> From: EV  on behalf of Roger Stockton via EV 
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 11:26 AM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Cheap L2 charging in parking places: Bolt EV'sIn 
> Production
> 
> ROBERT via EV wrote:
> 
>> (1) How does a vehicle with a J1772 connector know the rating of the NEMA
>> outlet?
> 
> The portable J1772 EVSE charging cord/adapter tells the vehicle via the pilot 
> signal how much AC current may be drawn.  A 120V J1772 cord will almost 
> certainly tell the vehicle not to draw more than 12A, so that it 

Re: [EVDL] PG's EV Charging Plan Still Angers Industry Players ...

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

This is in the ball park of an average North American home these days.  It's 
likely the local transformer has sufficient overcapacity for one or two 
additional homes in a subdivision so it's possible. Not the best solution but 
if it's all that's available not unreal either. 

Lawrence

> On Aug 4, 2016, at 02:55, Russ Sciville via EV  wrote:
> 
> Surely no-one would wish a Rapid to operate at 240v 1 ph?
> Large currents will require a larger transformer.
> All European Rapids will I am sure be operating with 3 phase power. Supply 
> cables and volt drop is dramatically smaller.
> There will be inevitable extra losses when a 240v single phase supply is 
> boosted to 400vDC as most Rapids work at. 
> 
>  From: Jim Walls via EV 
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List  
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 August 2016, 21:51
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] PG's EV Charging Plan Still Angers Industry Players ...
> 
> 44KW at 240V is about 185 amps (likely more because of conversion losses and 
> voltage drop).  That makes for very large wire.
>   
> Jim Walls
>   
>   
>   
>   
> 
> 
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] KillaJoule gets Official Guinness World Record

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

Congratulations. 

Lawrence

> On Jan 30, 2016, at 04:12, Pestka Denis via EV  wrote:
> 
> Congrats Bill and Eva !
> 
> Dennis
> 
> 
> From: EV  on behalf of Bill Dube via EV 
> 
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 1:18 AM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: [EVDL] KillaJoule gets Official Guinness World Record
> 
> Looks like Eva and the KillaJoule got into the "big book",
> Official Guinness Book of World Records.
> 
> Quite a nice write-up here:
> http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2016/1/my-story-how-one-woman-built-a-3-wheeled-electric-motorcycle-in-her-garage-and-s-414549
> 
> And a very nice compilation video here:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Vsr_GwzFUQ
> 
> Bill & Eva
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] WooHoo

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

>From what I have read is its ok to charge lithium to 100% but it's best not to 
>leave it there for extended periods. If you need the range then by all means 
>get a full charge but maybe time it so you can leave shortly after reaching 
>it.  Day to day using an 80% charge point just simplifies the process. 

Lawrence

> On Jan 4, 2016, at 18:56, Michael Ross via EV  wrote:
> 
> You can charge lead acid to 100%, but you should think twice about pushing
> Li ion that high.
> 
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 9:09 PM, Seth Rothenberg via EV 
> wrote:
> 
>> I'm driving up 95...leaving Arbutus for Charley's Point in a few.   Does
>> anyone know how to raise the charge limit to 100%?   70 miles!
>> Time to turn off the heat?
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20160104/b4fe11da/attachment.htm
>> ___
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> 
> -- 
> To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk.
> Thomas A. Edison
> 
> 
> A public-opinion poll is no substitute for thought.
> *Warren Buffet*
> 
> Michael E. Ross
> (919) 585-6737 Land
> (919) 576-0824  Google Phone
> (919) 600-2892 Cell
> 
> michael.e.r...@gmail.com
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Two charging inlets - relay "interlock" / safety question

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

Any reason not to just use a J1772 portable charger?

Lawrence

> On Nov 21, 2015, at 13:57, Jay Summet via EV  wrote:
> 
> Here is the specific circuit I have designed.
> 
> http://s9.postimg.org/ikp4miuhb/inlet_schematic.png
> 
> I would like any feedback on the above schematic. (Note that it only shows 
> the 240 volt power from the J1227 and 120 volt power from the RV inlet, the 
> Prox/Pilot lines from the J1227 are connected to the charger controller, and 
> it handles enabling the EVSE.)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jay
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. It may have disabled 
itself for safety reasons. It was a pile of junk you bought it. You have think 
you have rebuilt a car from that junk and now you want the systems activated 
without showing that the system is in any state where that can safely be done. 

Ps by 'you' I mean the generic you. 

Lawrence

 On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:42, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
 
 Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you
 wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it
 off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had
 no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I
 fail to understand how people can justify someone else disabling a car that
 they own.
 
 On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote:
 
 This is laughable.  Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with.
 
 But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you
 are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to
 take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage  CAR which you OWN.
 
 If  you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the
 help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and
 enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament.
 
 Bob
 
 
 On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
 wrote:
 
 On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
 wrote:
 
 I am afraid I side with Tesla on this.  As much as I like to be able to
 tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many
 sensors
 and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems.
 The
 car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making
 sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working.  Tesla
 says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not
 you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project.
 I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title
 when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the
 company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank,
 build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does
 not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up
 interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now,
 it
 is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These
 things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route
 for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing
 about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty
 claims
 at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety
 systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it.
 This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as
 complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt
 out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half
 assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or
 systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of
 the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to
 drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for
 Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that
 themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the
 car.
 If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about
 it
 until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about
 that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to
 be
 inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to
 do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control
 freaks.
 
 
 
 As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer
 in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no
 recall).  I tried to get  a replacement from the wreckers and was told
 sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I
 replace
 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't
 work -
 only a new computer will work.  Talking to my non dealer mechanic he
 said
 many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily
 service.
 
 Lawrence Harris
 This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix
 this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN
 locking
 is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still
 a
 stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about
 chop shops. They care about control. Now we're seeing that Tesla is
 showing
 their true colors as 

Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)

[Haritech (Gmail) via EV]

I agree. The seller didn't understand what he was buying. That's really the end 
of the story.

He didn't buy it from Tesla so it's not Teslas jobs to ensure the scrap was re 
manufacturable into a car. It is Teslas role/right to ensure their name and 
brand is protected. 

Lawrence

 On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:42, Ben Goren b...@trumpetpower.com wrote:
 
 On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org 
 wrote:
 
 Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled.
 
 Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The 
 buyer thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal.
 
 But, considering that it's Tesla, not the seller, who's responsible for 
 turning what was, in fact, a salvageable car into a pile of scrap...most of 
 us would consider that either theft or destruction of property. Morally, 
 whether or not legally.
 
 Imagine the car has, instead of a regular glovebox, a safe...and that the 
 entire wiring harness goes through this safe, and all the fuses are inside 
 the safe. For safety reasons, the safe is designed to lock itself when an 
 accelerometer detects a crash...but, though the manufacturer gave you the key 
 to the front of the safe when you bought the car, they neglected to give you 
 the key to the back of the safe that unlocks it after a crash. They still 
 have that key, but they won't give it to you, even though you ostensibly own 
 the car.
 
 Ethical companies do not pull these sorts of shenanigans.
 
 Tesla is well within its rights to publicly disclaim responsibility for what 
 this guy does with the car he's bought in known-damaged condition from a 
 third party. They don't have -- or, at least, _shouldn't_ have -- the right 
 to hinder him doing what he wants with the car, and that includes maintaining 
 control of parts of the car that they have no right keeping out of the 
 control of all their other owners.
 
 ...because, really: that's what this is all about. It's now apparent that 
 Tesla can turn iany/i of their cars into scrap metal just by pressing a 
 button, and if you don't like the fact that that's what they've done, your 
 only recourse is to sue one of the richest men on the planet. Good luck with 
 that, as they say.
 
 b
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)