EV Digest 6892
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: How the Prius Works
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: EV achilles' heel
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: EV achilles' heel - Trailer thoughts
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: How the Prius Works
by "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Doers vs talkers, was Otmar is getting rich?
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Doers vs talkers, was Otmar is getting rich?
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: How the Prius Works
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Doers vs talkers, was Otmar is getting rich?
by "Evan Tuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: gas taxes...
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10) Re: New Subscriber
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Re: Aircraft Starter generator
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Over-volted ADC: Warranty issue
by "Zeke Yewdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: High voltage and arc hazards
by "Zeke Yewdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: New Zillch Controller
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: EV achilles' heel
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Sorry to Dan and the list
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Sorry to Dan and the list
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Sorry to Dan and the list
by "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Did it ever occur to you that I was not the one in error
Cor van de Water skrev:
Dan,
Did it ever occur to you that almost every reply you receive
starts with "NO", after you make a statement?
In case you want to alter this, I suggest that you read up
on a subject before commenting, because it tells a lot
about a person when he is continuously corrected for making
false statements. Let me make it obvious: Nobody believes you
if all the long time senior members either do not take the
effort to reply to your posts (because you have shown an
attitude that you do not want to learn from the info on this list)
and others are constantly correcting the wrong data you are
spreading.
Now a very honest question:
Why are you on this list?
Are you trying to learn? Your attitude says no.
Are you trying to share knowledge? The corrections tell otherwise.
Are you trying to share your attitude? This list only exists by
enough people not having one that gets in the way all the time.
Many people on this list have studied the Prius intricate workings
and the genius construction in many unique new techniques, leading
to it being the highest mileage car that you can buy today in the
USA and it has sold almost a million units already.
So, your statement "why bother, it is just another plain ICE"
shows a total lack of what the Prius has established and how
it is a great way to make everyone aware of how electric drive
works well in a car, even though it is currently fully fueled
from gasoline.
Now, if your intention on this list is to stir as much as
possible controversy, then I think you are doing a wonderful job.
People like that are usually quickly recognised and categorised
as troll, after which everyone, except the inexperienced, will
ignore the troll.
Where do you stand?
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 Dan Frederiksen
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 1:16 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: How the Prius Works
(-Phil-) wrote:
Just to clarify, the Prius doesn't have a separate CVT. The CVT *is*
the motor/generators!
By shuffling power between the 2 motor/gens you effectively have a
CVT. It's a totally ingenious system!
aside from the fact that the end result is an expensive ICE car and not an
EV. it's effectively an electric clutch. the design will not survive and
should never have been. if one was conspiratorially inclined (and one is)
one might be suspicious that they intentionally chose a bad design because
it could give the illusion of being environmentally friendly while still
remaining a pure ICE car.
The motor/gens are surprisingly small and oil cooled. They have high
voltage windings on them. The voltage used is 500v which comes from a
bi-directional DC-DC converter as the battery is only a little more
than 200v. The inverter box under the hood contains this DC-DC
converter, a smaller DC-DC converter to keep the aux 12v battery
charged, and 3 IGBT based inverters. 2 larger ones for the 2
motor/gens and 1 small one for the electric AC compressor.
high voltage does appear to be the key. amps are bad
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
wrong
I don't care to reiterate the obvious for the blind. maybe you'll
realize the truth when you buy one. you'll probably hve forgotten
though, maybe even think it was your idea to begin with
Cor van de Water wrote:
Hi Dan,
It depends on the situation people are in:
some have never a need to go more than a few miles, so
the EV is their only car and does not need range extension.
Some have an occasional need and know that renting a car
will be the most efficient way for their transportation
need and they do not need to bother with an unused ICE car
during the time in between.
Many others have more than one car, so before each trip
they think for half a second which car is appropriate.
Very few people use range extension.
Most times it is a total disappointment, a kludge that
takes away from the simple and clean EV idea.
In addition, even thinking about making a genset or
something comparable get good emissions is a royal pain.
There is very little point if you are interested in saving
the environment to have an EV that needs its genset a small
percentage of the time but spews out many times more crud,
defeating the whole purpose.
I did not even address reliability, NOISE, and other issues.
Not everyone is thinking about it from this perspective
and sometimes habit and comfort are stronger than dedication
as can be witnessed when someone needs to mow his lawn.
Most lawnmowers belch out more during one hour of mowing
than the modern car does during an entire week of driving
(not including CO2).
Hope this helps,
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 Dan Frederiksen
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:07 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: EV achilles' heel
I think everyone can live with the cost of replacing lead acids once in a
while, and the energy loss in them from common discharge and even assuming
some heads would pop out of dark odorfilled areas and we would fix the
electronics cost for conversions we still have the EVs current achilles'
heel, the range.
how many have tried using a small combustion engine for range extension in
EVs? I imagine for instance a turbocharged 250cc motorcycle engine or even
look into the possibility of using a tesla turbine because of its simplicity
and potentially very compact size. (presumably run very smoothly too)
anyone tried auxiliary combustion? I know JB Straubel did a trailer but
that was a full size car motor as opposed to a small onboard one.
is everyone driving pure EV?
Dan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
no. small onboard ice gen for use only when batteries are flat.
jukka wrote:
How about a small trailer with even a bit of room for ballast ?
I was plannig to make a trailer with Lions under the floor. And a nice
small cover for the extra luggage.
The trailer would be an independent unit with charger and etc. You
drive with it a distance (say 80 miles) then you leave it for charging
some where and continue without it or you can just keep dragging it
along untile reached the destiation. You could still use the oh-so-old
lead in the car for comfort.
A small trailer could sell for 5000-8000 USD. Or how about If few
would be made and rented for testing ? Or a EV chapter aquire one and
folks can use it when needed. 1 week annually each member.
-Jukka
Michael Wendell kirjoitti:
I've considered a veggie oil diesel or a propane generator
given that the tesla roadster motor makes 170kWh shouldn't
30Kw generation be possible in a reasonably sized generator.
didn't we just spend more than a month discussing the innefficiencies
of an
onboard (or trailered) generator? is it possible to put this
information in
the FAQ somewhere and point all future discussions to that URL?
m.
Michael Wendell
Speedgoat Bicycles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Win a $5000 custom mountain bike, and help fight breat cancer!
http://www.speedgoat.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Phil,
I read the wikipedia article and it still sounds like what the article
Jeff sent the link for. MG1 is the generator hooked to a planetary
gearbox. It sounds like the are now calling the planetary gearbox a
"differential" now instead. The wikipedia and the ecrostech articles
don't show pictures of the mechanicals of the system. Does anyone have
pictures of how MG1 and MG2 connects? Saying that MG1 connects to the
Sun gear doesn't show HOW it connects. Does it have a gear on the
outside that MG1 drives? Does it have clutches like the sun gear of an
automatic have? I like the mention of MG2 connected through the
driveshaft. That makes sense since it is responsible for the torque.
It looks like MG1 could be just chained to the ICE motor and run only
when the motor is running. It would be really nice to see one of these
out of the car so each part could be shown and a more detailed operation
explained. Personnally I think the ecrostech article is much more
informative. The wikipedia article is interesting but as I understand
it wikipedia is not the most reliable source of information since anyone
can edit the data.
Jody
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of (-Phil-)
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 6:01
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: How the Prius Works
I suggest you guys do a modicum of research..... You are incorrect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Synergy_Drive
-Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: How the Prius Works
> No, the CVT is a proper transmission and can carry the full HP of the
> engine to the wheels.
> There is only one electric motor/generator. Actually there's a second
> motor for engine starting and providing countertorque for the CVT
gears
> but it's not a drive motor.
> The motor/generator is only there to boost the peak engine power and
allow
> the engine to shut off when its high power is not needed and there is
> sufficient battery power to meet the driver's demands.
>
> Danny
>
> Dan Frederiksen wrote:
>
>> I didn't say it was a series hybrid. I said it was essentially an
>> electric clutch. isn't it?
>>
>> I don't think the prius arrangement could be cheaper than a series
>> layout. I would be interested in hearing the design justification but
>> doubt it would satisfy
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> Danny Miller skrev:
>>
>>> No, it has a mechanical CVT transmission in there. Gears and all.
The
>>> Prius is a parallel hybrid, if the wiring between a generator and
motor
>>> were the only link from engine to wheels then it'd be a series
hybrid.
>>>
>>> It's interesting to note that the engineers spent an awful lot of
design
>>> time, expense and weight to make a CVT tranny rather than add a
separate
>>> motor from the generator so they can run at different speeds.
Either
>>> the losses are simply too high or the second motor is more expensive
>>> than the tranny.
>>>
>>> The earlier generations of Prius used an electric motor that could
not
>>> produce great acceleration or top speed without the engine. In 2003
the
>>> hatchback had a 50KW motor instead of the earlier 30KW and 33KW
ones.
>>>
>>> Danny
>>>
>>> Dan Frederiksen wrote:
>>>
>>>> (-Phil-) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just to clarify, the Prius doesn't have a separate CVT. The CVT
*is*
>>>>> the motor/generators!
>>>>> By shuffling power between the 2 motor/gens you effectively have a
>>>>> CVT. It's a totally ingenious system!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> aside from the fact that the end result is an expensive ICE car and
not
>>>> an EV. it's effectively an electric clutch. the design will not
survive
>>>> and should never have been. if one was conspiratorially inclined
(and
>>>> one is) one might be suspicious that they intentionally chose a bad
>>>> design because it could give the illusion of being environmentally
>>>> friendly while still remaining a pure ICE car.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
TO247 then. samish thing
sot227 in your case
Rich Rudman wrote:
Niether I or Otmar use TO-220 Igs....
too small...
Look farther down in the spendy charts...
APT80GP60Js...
I will let Otmar give you his chip numbers. If he wants to educate you.
Got yer power supply topology chart handy???
Look up Buck mode... That's the controller...
Look up Boost mode and Buckboost and Buck, On the fly of the grid's sine
wave for my power stage.
Digi Krime is a book of many opertunities... you make them as you see fit.
Ot buys direct as so do I from manufactures Reps for the power Sand, The
small stuff is Miser and Digikrime....
I am not sure if this is fun or torture...
Madman
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
and I know about buck and boost. aim higher.
things of actual use to me would be thermal experience with specific
devices. can they actually do as the specs say. what kind of
heatsink/environment gives what kind of Tc for a given current in a
given transistor.
I'm also looking to know what kind of circuitry can efficiently supply a
low voltage from an unknown 100-400v dc source and that source alone
Rich Rudman wrote:
Got yer power supply topology chart handy???
Look up Buck mode... That's the controller...
Look up Boost mode and Buckboost and Buck, On the fly of the grid's sine
wave for my power stage.
Digi Krime is a book of many opertunities... you make them as you see fit.
Ot buys direct as so do I from manufactures Reps for the power Sand, The
small stuff is Miser and Digikrime....
I am not sure if this is fun or torture...
Madman
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I know the prius system is not about mechanical friction slip. try to
generalize the concept of a clutch beyond specific products and realize
I am right
to include a magnetic clutch or even one based on control of a diff...
Rich Rudman wrote:
Wait you Mush heads ..
The Yota Torque split device...
is basicly a Differential that has a Engine and two motors to divide the
torque and the electrical power up in any way needed.
All the variable math is done with the BLDC vector drive motors.
NO clutches... no sliping of anything mechanical.
Take a open differential... lock one wheel.. the other goes 2x the speed it
was going.. let the locked wheel spin.. at what ever speed you want it to..
taking or adding torque via a 4 quadrant motor.. Add back in the negative
torque to the output shaft... and you can have just about any ratio you need
to move the car attached to the last wheel... You get mechanical torque..
and added power from the Batteries..and the Amp path from the alternator.
It looks aLOT like a planetary Automatic transmission. With motors attached
to the output shaft and the planetary cluster.
Cool stuff and about 1/2 as complicated as I used to think.
Madman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Frederiksen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: How the Prius Works
so you can't generalize. no biggie.
I think it's a bad design because it's a complicated way to make a gas
car look like an EV
TrotFox Greyfoot wrote:
Um dude. It's not a clutch. A clutch is a friction based mechanical
disconnect. The Prius has an electronic torque converter if you want
to call it anything other than a CVT.
BTW, it's a CVT. I'd actually like to know why you think it's a bad
design but seeing as it's in an ICE car, please tell me offline.
I seriously doubt you're going to be asked for any autographs. Just
my hunch though...
Trot, the fairly-technical, fox...
On 6/13/07, Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Danny Miller wrote:
No, the CVT is a proper transmission and can carry the full HP of the
engine to the wheels.
There is only one electric motor/generator. Actually there's a
second
motor for engine starting and providing countertorque for the CVT
think about it
it is the variable component deciding the grip from the motor to the
wheels..
no autographs please :)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 6/14/07, Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm also looking to know what kind of circuitry can efficiently supply a
low voltage from an unknown 100-400v dc source and that source alone
A Manzanita Micros PFC charger will do it nicely. Ask Rich about what
kind of circuitry is used in that..
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I would agree...
We pay taxes on our electrical usage - NC DOT would argue that the money
goes to
other items, and not to their worker's salaries (which is apparently where
the 29.9 cents
per gallon goes).
Here's the link (that the news-paper article failed to convey...)
http://biofuels.coop/general-information/taxes
Of course, this doesn't apply to EVers...just biofuels/home-brewers.
Apparently the $2000 bond is required "just in case you don't pay your
taxes"
That is, they're pre-taxing you now, just in case you don't pay later.
Suppose you quit using your homebrew. Do you get that money back, if
you're caught up?
This $2000 bond doesn't make sense either.
Technically, he didn't "brew" his own home fuel... he bought it at Costco.
I think they should shoot me now, just in case I don't die when the time
comes.
Heck, I'm surprised they didn't audit me when I moved to NC in the first
place...
Using their logic, I should sue you now, just in case you hit me (in a car
accident) later.
Ok, I'll stop whining now.
Ed
"Randall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
06/13/2007 22:55
Please respond to
ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To
<ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
cc
Subject
Re: gas taxes...
He already pays his fair share...he pays sales tax, income tax, and
property
tax on the car. It is NC's problem to balance its budget...and diesels
running on vegetable oil is NOT a new thing...the very first diesels ran
on
peanut oil as per design by Rudolf Diesel. :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: gas taxes...
>I agree on paying fair share. The problem is we are cutting new ground
> here and a lot of these issues just haven't come up before. I am
> sending an email to my local congressman to see if he is doing anything
> law wise to asses taxes for EV cars and people who are making their own
> fuel. I don't want to end up being fined for not paying road tax.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:35
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: gas taxes...
>
> 1) guy converts diesel to run on veggie oil.
> 2) NC tax people come after him, wanting his first born, for "tax"
> reasons.
>
> The gist of my concern (in the article) is:
>
> Folks that use the road, have to pay road-use taxes, which are bundled
> into the price of gasoline and diesel.
> Of course, Electric Vehicles don't pay this tax....because we don't use
> gasoline.
> Moreover, vehicles that get better fuel economy pay less tax (I found an
> article about that - be prepared in the future for the DMV to begin
> retrieving our odometer readings for miles-driven taxation purposes; who
> knows, probably already happens in some states, and certainly does for
> "business" or personally owned "business use" vehicles).
>
>
> Here's the math (its simple, even I can do it).
> Average miles traveled: 12000
> Average MPG (for my camry): 22
> Thats ~ 545 gallons.
>
> NC charges 29.9 cents a gallon (according to the article).
> (I'm sure its more like 29.999 cents)
> .299 * 545 = ~ 162...
> Thats $162 a year in taxes (NC State)
> This website
> http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp
> indicates Federal tax is 18.4 cents per gallon.
> 18.4 * 545 = ~100.28
>
> (What are the federal and state taxes on our electric bill? I donno,
> haven't looked; I would guess that this *could* be subtracted, to keep
> the SOBs in government totally honest).
> (note: I don't like big government; I could go on, but I doubt you'd
> appreciate it).
>
> Anyway.
>
> The article states that this guy is getting charged $1000 fine, for NC
> state taxes (what about county? city?).
>
> Either way, I'm concerned.
> (Finally) - Here's my question:
>
> Are the Tax people going to come after us (I use "us" as a generic term;
> us EVers, or more specifically, us NC EVers...) because uncle thief
> wants more tax revenue?
> What recourse do we have (federally, or statewise) - if any?
> Has anyone heard of this happening before?
> Do we get rewarded (pay less tax) because we're trying to "save the
> environment" - "protect the US from terrorists by not giving them money"
>
> (etc, pick a reason for why you drive electric).
>
> Additional comments, and Charlotte Observer article below...
>
> I'd like to own a gas station, and say "Gasoline, $2.00 a gallon, PLUS
> TAX (to let people know how much the government gets).
> If folks knew how much tax they paid, think they'd get a little upset?
> (I'm sure thats why the politicos hide as much tax as they can).
>
> Note: I'm not trying to "get one over on the government that provides
> the roads" - I should "help pay" for the road. Not a problem.
> Please don't carp about me trying to avoid "paying my fair share" - What
> I don't want is for the evil succubus tax person to come after me 3
> years hence, and decide I should pay $5k in taxes, and another $10k in
> fines.
>
>
>
> http://www.charlotte.com/112/story/153260.html
>
>
>
>
> THOSE WHO MAKE THEIR OWN ENVIRONMENT-FRIENDLY GAS CAN AVOID PAIN AT THE
> PUMP BUT NOT THE TAXES.
> A price to pay for alternative fuels
> BRUCE HENDERSON
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Bob Teixeira re-applies a sticker touting an alternative fuel he uses
> in his car. He plans to fight to change fuel-tax laws that have hit his
> wallet.Bob Teixeira decided it was time to take a stand against U.S.
> dependence on foreign oil.
>
> So last fall the Charlotte musician and guitar instructor spent $1,200
> to convert his 1981 diesel Mercedes to run on vegetable oil. He bought
> soybean oil in 5-gallon jugs at Costco, spending about 30 percent more
> than diesel would cost.
>
> His reward, from a state that heavily promotes alternative fuels: a
> $1,000 fine last month for not paying motor fuel taxes.
>
> He's been told to expect another $1,000 fine from the federal
> government.
>
> And to legally use veggie oil, state officials told him, he would have
> to first post a $2,500 bond.
>
> Teixeira is one of a growing number of fuel-it-yourselfers -- backyard
> brewers who recycle restaurant grease or make moonshine for their car
> tanks. They do it to save money, reduce pollution or thumb their noses
> at oil sheiks.
>
> They're also caught in a web of little-known state laws that can stifle
> energy independence.
>
> State Sen. Stan Bingham, R-Davidson, is known around Raleigh for his
> diesel Volkswagen fueled by used soybean oil. The car sports a "Goodbye,
> OPEC" sign.
>
> "If somebody was going to go to this much trouble to drive around in a
> car that uses soybean oil, they ought to be exempt" from state taxes, he
> said.
>
> The N.C. Department of Revenue, which fined Teixeira, has asked
> legislators to waive the $2,500 bond for small fuel users. The
> department also told Teixeira, after the Observer asked about his case
> this week, that it will compromise on his fine.
>
> But officials say they'll keep pursuing taxes on all fuels used in
> highway vehicles. With its 29.9-cent a gallon gas tax, the state
> collects $1.2 billion each year to pay for road construction.
>
> "With the high cost of fuel right now, the department does recognize
> that a lot of people are looking for relief," said Reggie Little,
> assistant director of the motor fuel taxes division. "We're not here to
> hurt the small guy, we're just trying to make sure that the playing
> field is level."
>
> Use promoted, little regulation
>
> State policies firmly endorse alternative fuels.In 2005 legislators
> directed state agencies to replace 20 percent of their annual petroleum
> use with alternatives by 2010. About 6,000 of the state's 8,500 vehicles
> are equipped to use ethanol. The state fleet also includes about 135
> gas-electric hybrids.
>
> Few states, however, are prepared to regulate the new fuels, says the
> National VegOil Board, which promotes vegetable oil fuel.
>
> "State offices do not have the forms to appropriately and fairly deal
> with VegOil, nor the staff to enforce the non-existent forms," said
> director Cynthia Shelton. "So either they tell people inquiring about
> compliance to get lost, or they make them jump through a bunch of
> arbitrary hoops."
>
> Outraged Illinois legislators this spring quickly waived that state's
> $2,500 bond requirement when an elderly man was nabbed for using waste
> vegetable oil.
>
> In the mountain district of state Sen. John Snow, D-Cherokee,
> home-brewed ethanol was once known as moonshine. But a couple of
> constituents who made it for fuel have been fined for the same tax
> violation that got Teixeira in trouble.
>
> Snow has introduced several bills to promote biodiesel, which under
> state law includes vegetable oil.
>
> "One of the biggest problems in the state is a real lack of information
> for people who want to use alternative fuels," said Snow's research
> assistant, Jonathan Ducote. "It's just now appearing on (regulators')
> radar."
>
> Done in by bumper sticker
>
> Teixeira's story began near Lowe's Motor Speedway on May 14. As
> recreational vehicles streamed in for race week, revenue investigators
> were checking fuel tanks of diesel RVs for illegal fuel.
>
> The investigators quickly spotted Teixeira's passing bumper sticker:
> "Powered by 100% vegetable oil."
>
> "It was like some twist of fate that put me there," he said. "It was
> like I was asking for them to stop me."
>
> Teixeira says revenue officials are just doing their jobs. But he thinks
> it's unfair that he was lumped with people who purposely try to avoid
> fuel taxes.
>
> "Individuals who are trying to do the right thing environmentally cannot
> and should not continue to take this kind of financial hit," he wrote
> Gov.
> Mike Easley.
>
> Teixeira says he'll pay the state fine and apply for a state fuel
> license.
> But pumping regular diesel again "broke my heart."
>
> "I'm ready to get myself legal," he said, "and start using vegetable oil
> again."
>
> Alternative Fuel Vehicles*
>
> North CarolinaDiesel 118,479
>
> Flex fuel 121,547
>
> (ethanol capable)
>
> Hybrid 11,758
>
> Total 251,784
>
> South Carolina
>
> Diesel 54,786
>
> Flex fuel 68,303
>
> Hybrid 3,264
>
> Total 126,353
>
> *Registered as of July 2006
>
> SOURCE: Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
>
> More on Fuel Taxes
>
> Piedmont Biofuels, a biodiesel cooperative in Pittsboro, posts links to
> state tax laws on its Web site: http://biofuels.coop/general
>
> -information/taxes//. The N.C. Department of Revenue's motor fuels tax
> division has a toll-free number: 877-308-9092.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
jukka> I have the 1000th cycle just coming up with LFP-30 cell on
jukka> tester.
That's something I've been meaning to ask. What constitutes a cycle? Any
time you plug in the charger? Or is there some minimum amount of discharge
required before you consider a trip to the wall outlet a cycle?
Thx,
--
Skip Montanaro - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.webfast.com/~skip/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to Phelps and All,
Phelps wrote:
Hey dick did not your mother tell you not to play with strangers and not to
piss people off you don't know..
Whoa...calm down, now. Phelps, Jim Husted is just about the nicest guy
you'd ever meet. You definitely didn't get that he was being playful and
was in no way, trying to belittle you, In fact, Jim saves the belittling
for himself :-) Jim's perhaps one of the most giving and sharing of all
the EVers on this list and since he joined-up about two years ago, has
become one our most valued contributers. He gives away a lot of his time
freely to help newbies like yourself.
I would also guess you don't know anything
about the question anyway...
Your guess would be wrong. Jim knows more than just about anyone about DC
motors.
From Mike Willmon:
Hey Phelps, that was the one guy you would really want to answer your question, although you probably >wouldn't know it.
As Mike said, Jim is the one person you 'want' to be having a good
conversation with. He rebuilds electric traction motors for a living,
and knows more about vintage electric motors and what's inside them,
then pretty much anyone on this list. Jim is the architect behind my
seriously powerful Siamese 8 electric drag motor.
Now, back to your question about using the aircraft starter-generator. You
mentioned it is permanent magnet, but I doubt it is. I've seen an awful lot of
these in my time, and never have any of them been a PM type. In contrast, all
of them are a compound-wound type with both a series winding for the starter
section and a shunt winding for the generator mode...both modes can be used as
a motor, both modes can be used by themselves, and both modes can be use at the
same time.
Aside from its basic inefficiency, another problem with using an aircraft
starter-generator, is that most of them have a floating bearing at the splined
output end, in that the motor needs to be mated into a receiver casting of an
aircraft engine that centers the motor's shaft and provides the final bearing.
Outside of an aircraft engine, your starter-generator will need to have an
external bearing plate and bearing to support the shaft before you can use it
to power-up an EV.
OK, enough from me, time to get your appetite up so you can eat a little crow this morning, apologize to Jim (who was only being playful and offering his for-free help), and start over.
Though not the best motor to use for an EV conversion, the surplus starter-generators can still be used and will help you learn all kinds of cool stuff.
Have fun with your project.
See Ya....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have heard of people running as high as 284 volts into the 9" ADC.
The prototype of the Tango was doing that for at least a while. I
think that most the time the two motors were in series, but IIRC, it
did have a parallel mode too.
Z
On 6/14/07, Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not a problem..
I have a Raptor 1200 on a AvDC 8 inch motor.. and I drag race it....
Check your drive line.. 1200 amps and a 9 incher will stain U joints...
You will love it!
Madman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Kobb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 8:37 PM
Subject: Over-volted ADC: Warranty issue
Hello, All --
I recently bought a 2002 S-10 shortbed and would like to convert it to a
156v EV.
To do this, I'd like to pair a DCP 1200 controller with an ADC FB1-4001A 9.1
inch motor.
I know two factoids about this combo:
1. Even though the motor has a rating of 144v, many people have run it with
156v.
2. ADC's FB1 warranty does not cover the kind of amperage that the DCP 1200
can deliver. I would therefore be using that controller and motor combo at
my own risk.
My question for the List is this: How concerned should I be?
Before you answer, you should know that I want to use this truck as a
daily-driver, back-and-forth to work. Even in my ICE car, I don't like to
drive faster than 65 mph on the freeway, and freeway-driving is 90% of the
daily travel.
So, what do you think? Am I asking for trouble by pairing these two major
components? Or is it no biggie; i.e., nothing to worry about?
Thanks in advance for your comments.
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I put my own labels on PV battery systems that say Arc Hazard.
Because that's really what it is, not high voltage hazard (except for
the 48 volt ones -- if you are in a humid climate, you can feel the 48
volts, so it's a voltage hazard too). An EV battery is both an arc
hazard and a high voltage hazard (assuming 48 volts or more, and
definitely for the 300 volt packs). I've arced an EV battery once --
don't want to ever do it again. Instantly turned a battery terminal
on a yellow top and an entire bronze lug on a 2/0 cable into a molten
puddle. EV's really should have a few warning labels under the hood
to let someone poking around there know that not everything should be
touched -- and just to remind even seasoned EVers to not let down
their guard.
Still better than pumping flammable and/or explosive liquids around at
high pressure through little rubber hoses that a squirrel can easily
bite through, in conjunction with 20kV electricity, I think...
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Wow, a single reasonably clear minded person.
I largely agree but I don't intent to make a charger to begin with
though. the need is certainly there just as with the controller. DCDC too.
Joe Smalley wrote:
Dan;
I think you are onto something big here.
obviusly
Yes, a feature packed, reliable and powerful controller does cost a lot
not sure I agree with that though
You can reduce the costs by:
1. Dropping features,
2. Using fewer and cheaper components,
3. Derating the capabilities, and
4. Not offering any warrantee or installation support.
sure
To build a cheap controller, you do not want to build anything that looks
like the Zilla. There are way too many parts, too many assembly operations,
too many features that need to be tested, too many interfaces, too much data
coming out, and too much instruction needed to allow someone to install it
in their vehicle.
I think so too
To build a cheap controller, you need to use as few parts as possible, use
as few connections as possible, reduce the feature set to a bare minimum,
produce a set of instructions that can be followed by the average hobbyist
using common household tools, and have the customer build the controllers so
that you have no customer support or manufacturing liability issues.
simple, cheap and open source. yes
Otmar spends $20000 on transistors so he knows they match and they will work
in parallel. If you use one big transistor, you won't need to match
transistors since you only use one.
that was the initial plan yes
The Radio Shack IRF510 transistors (276-2072 @ $1.99) are rated at only 3
amps at 60 volts. That is not big enough to run a very big motor. The IRF640
(18 amps at 200 V) that they formerly stocked had some potential. You need
bigger transistors. Forget about Radio Shack as a power parts source.
Radioshack never entered the equation. that was from Chip's idiotic
protrayal of me. My name is Dan Frederiksen. not crankenstein
I have some 1200V 600A IGBTs and I expect the full range can be gotten
from digikey and the like.
You are right. The hairball has too many features for your design. You
should drop it. You don't need it. The Curtis and the power wheels designs
have startup current surge problems. You need to make sure the customer
understands that he needs to deal with this problem, since your design will
have reliability issues (just like Curtis and Power Wheels) if the customer
does not deal with it.
I don't have sufficient insight yet to say for certain but is it given
that the ability to not shoot your load prematurely (so to speak) must
be complicated?
Seems wrong to me.
You can cut costs by having the customer take
responsibility for your lack of a precharge controller. Then again, you may
want to design a precharge controller that is external to the controller and
is sold separately. That would look like a hairball and does not fit your
plan.
indeed. the very notion of a second box seems wrong to me.
You are right again about the PFC being complex. There are a lot of features
packed into that box.
I didn't say that but I no doubt would
If you want pictures of the inside of a PFC-20 charger, they have been at
the following location since January 2001:
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc20rts.jpg
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc2012.jpg
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc2011.jpg
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc20ls.jpg
thanks
The toughest part of building a battery charger is determining when to turn
the current down or turn it off. You could put two settings on your charger:
Bulk and equalize. You could have the customer manually switch between the
two settings on the base model. You could call it an automatic charger if
the switch position changed itself at a preset time or voltage level so that
the customer did not need to watch the charger all night waiting for the
proper moment to throw the switch. Maybe the switch adds too much to the
cost and no one would buy the more expensive model.
well ideally the charger would be part of the controller in which case
my idea would be to monitor the Ah beeing spent so as to use that info
for recharging as well. to observe and know the battery characteristics.
The idea was to use a microcontroller chip anyway and the functionality
seems possible
The name Zillch controller is actually not bad but probably wouldn't
want to link it with the emotional baggage of the conflict here
Dan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm not talking about just serving needs. I'm talking about the most
efficient way to get to an EV society. and the range extender is that
until EE storage can be done right or something even better gets out.
for the rare occasions the ice kicks in it could well run on biofuel
Mark Karatovic wrote:
Hi all,
Would hate to take away the environmental aspect of the EV as the
pure no emissions car but it depends on your needs really, and that is
the "perspective" that everyone is thinking of. That is their own
perspective. If an EV by itself doesn't suit your needs isn't a
compromise better than nothing? Renting a car while it sounds good, is
not really an option lets say if you want to go on a holiday for a
week and want a car at your destination while your there. Well it is,
but I would rather not. A hybrid? Well I personally think the Prius is
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 04:55 AM 6/14/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In situations where public replies are reasonable do you not trust your
fellow list members to hit the reply-to-all button? After all, most of them
are (I think) smart enough to properly insulate their wrenches to avoid
shorts. Don't you think they can tell between private and public responses?
I have *never* seen a mailing list that failed due to lack of flow because
the list members weren't smart enough to hit the proper 'r'eply key.
So, you want to change the default so that the default is to require
extra effort to reply to the list?
Yeah right. Makes lots of sense.
So, thousands of people need to go to extra effort on every posting,
to save 1 or 2 posts a YEAR that are embarrassingly posted publicly
unintentionally.
sheesh.
(And not all mail packages handle "Reply to All" and the "ReplyTo:"
tag correctly. Eudora has the wonderful habit of replying to all the
addresses, and replacing each and every one with the ReplyTo value.)
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
stating the obvious, this should be a webbased forum
can someone set that up?
it should also be augmented with live (logged) chat and there is a newly
formed irc channel #EV on freenode.net should anyone be intererested.
Dan
TrotFox Greyfoot write:
Personally, as someone who is also a member of another list which is
setup to reply to sender...
I hate it.
There are frequently questions asked that no answers are posted to the
list. Also frequently, I forget to "reply to all" because it's the
Only list I know of that's setup that way. Every other list I am on,
or have been on, is setup to reply to list normally.
So, I vote to leave it the way it is. Here's hoping Dan cares what I
think. } ; ]
Trot, the contributory, fox...
On 6/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John> True, it would certainly stop all those annoying discussions!
John> Lots of questions posted and no answers posted. How useful.
In situations where public replies are reasonable do you not trust your
fellow list members to hit the reply-to-all button? After all, most
of them
are (I think) smart enough to properly insulate their wrenches to avoid
shorts. Don't you think they can tell between private and public
responses?
I have *never* seen a mailing list that failed due to lack of flow
because
the list members weren't smart enough to hit the proper 'r'eply key.
--
Skip Montanaro - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.webfast.com/~skip/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I like it the way it is. I would just like it if Dan would quit
blasting people and being rude.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John G. Lussmyer
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 9:53
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Sorry to Dan and the list
At 04:55 AM 6/14/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In situations where public replies are reasonable do you not trust your
>fellow list members to hit the reply-to-all button? After all, most of
>them are (I think) smart enough to properly insulate their wrenches to
>avoid shorts. Don't you think they can tell between private and public
responses?
>I have *never* seen a mailing list that failed due to lack of flow
>because the list members weren't smart enough to hit the proper 'r'eply
key.
So, you want to change the default so that the default is to require
extra effort to reply to the list?
Yeah right. Makes lots of sense.
So, thousands of people need to go to extra effort on every posting, to
save 1 or 2 posts a YEAR that are embarrassingly posted publicly
unintentionally.
sheesh.
(And not all mail packages handle "Reply to All" and the "ReplyTo:"
tag correctly. Eudora has the wonderful habit of replying to all the
addresses, and replacing each and every one with the ReplyTo value.)
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
