EV Digest 7011
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) A123 cells the DeWalt way
by Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) a little thought problem for the list
by "Michael Wendell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Ideal EV configuration for my situation?
by "Matthew Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Students take Porsche to electric avenue
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Stupid question....
by Tim Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Ideal EV configuration for my situation?
by "Matthew Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Ideal EV configuration for my situation?
by "Mark Eidson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Ideal EV configuration for my situation?
by "Mark Eidson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Balancing NiCad batteries?
by Jerry McIntire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Catch phrases for the EVDL
by Lock Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Speed Reducers in the Nose
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: conversion question
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Speed Reducers in the Nose
by "Zeke Yewdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Speed Reducers in the Nose
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Speed Reducers in the Nose
by Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: conversion question
by "Tom S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: Speed Reducers in the Nose
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Stupid question....
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: conversion question
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: My power consumption
by Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: conversion question
by "Tom S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) RE: conversion question
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) RE: conversion question
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Stupid question....
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) RE: conversion question
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: Ideal EV configuration for my situation?
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: Ideal EV configuration for my situation?
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) RE: Speed Reducers in the Nose
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29) Re: AGM vs Gel
by "Tehben Dean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
others may do better but toolmanonlline on ebay (a big seller) seems
willing to sell them for 100$ including shipping if you buy around 100
so that's 10$ per cell delivered worldwide.
maybe a little less in USA
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
okay, my boss here at the bike shop has a very nice 1978 mercedes-benz
unimog 406 DoKa which has developed an engine problem. i jokingly suggested
he should convert it to electric. then i started thinking, maybe he SHOULD
convert it to electric.
so, here are the givens...
it's a unimog 406 DoKa, and weighs almost 4 tons! please don't recommend a
different donor vehicle, that's not the point.
gross weight is probably off the charts, so no real limit on battery weight,
but they need to fit on the flatbed, which is about 6 feet square (and
unfortunately 4+ feet up in the air!)
he lives 5 miles from the shop, but it's a 1500' elevation difference. all
downhill in the morning, and a steep 5 mile climb at night. as a point of
reference though, i think the diesel in there now only maxes out at 25mph or
so up that hill.
he should also have another 10 miles per day available to run into town or
take his daughter to school.
it would probably sit for 6-10 hours during the workday, and could be
charging during that time.
one additional monkeywrench... one of his goals was to use it to plow his
driveway. so it should be able to run at heavy loads, pushing a plow for a
few miles, in below-freezing temps.
so, can it be done? what's the best solution?
m.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the quick replies guys.
Thanks for pointing out that hydraulic regen systems are not feasible
on my EV Jeff, that saved me a lot of time.
Mark, I love your idea. I'll try to fit that into the system
immediately. Do you leave the motor engaged during normal driving or
do you only engage it during the braking process? I'm under the
impression that a series wound DC motor would not normally impede
operation of the vehicle (no perm magnet).
I'm looking into the use of the zilla or curtis motor controllers, and
I'm having difficulty in matching up a motor with a controller. What
does a 1000A controller mean anyways? Is that a nominal or a maximum
rating? Also, where is the maximum A rating for a motor? I can't seem
to find one.
Thanks guys,
Matt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
More schools jumping on the electric wagon:
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/porsche-0605.html
Hey wouldn't that be neat (Gadget?), and electric covered wagon from the old
west :-)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK, my turn to ask a stupid question.
I have a Baldor motor, the nameplate says DC Motor, 74V 2200RPM, 1.5HP
It doesn't specify if it is series, shunt, or permanent magnet.
It only has two 14ga. leads and swapping polarity on them causes the motor to
reverse direction. the RPM is pretty tightly matched to the applied voltage. So
I'm pretty confident it is not series wound.
Turning the 5/8" motor shaft produces a voltage on the leads that varies with
speed. However, I cannot detect any evidence of cogging.
Only 8 volts applied creates enough torque that I cannot hold the motor shaft
from turning with my bare hand. (I'm not considered weak either)
Does this sound like a PM or Shunt motor?
Why is that a stupid question?? Because I could probably just look up the motor
part number and it would tell me. However, I can remember all of the above
crap, but have no idea what the motor part number is. (It's at home, I'm not)
--
Stay Charged!
Hump
I-5, Blossvale NY
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi guys, just one more question for the moment. I've been using uve's
calculator today and it says that I can have a 91 mile range at
100km/h (60m/h)! How accurate is this calculator? Does it account for
losses due to acceleration/deceleration, etc? If this is true, I might
not need to change the donor vehicle after all, assuming that the
vehicle can hold 1500lbs of batteries.
Also, when the range is calculated, does it use 100%DOD, or 80% or
something else? I'd need to factor that into the battery since I want
maximum cycle life.
Lastly, I seem to be getting the best range at 1st gear for
everything. The mercedes service rep said that it is possible to
change the gears on the differential box. How difficult is this to do
normally? I'd like to make use of the other gears as well, so if I
actually ran into a hill, it would be possible to climb it.
Thanks guys,
Matt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Checkout this page for ideas.....
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/736
On 7/10/07, Matthew Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi guys, just one more question for the moment. I've been using uve's
calculator today and it says that I can have a 91 mile range at
100km/h (60m/h)! How accurate is this calculator? Does it account for
losses due to acceleration/deceleration, etc? If this is true, I might
not need to change the donor vehicle after all, assuming that the
vehicle can hold 1500lbs of batteries.
Also, when the range is calculated, does it use 100%DOD, or 80% or
something else? I'd need to factor that into the battery since I want
maximum cycle life.
Lastly, I seem to be getting the best range at 1st gear for
everything. The mercedes service rep said that it is possible to
change the gears on the differential box. How difficult is this to do
normally? I'd like to make use of the other gears as well, so if I
actually ran into a hill, it would be possible to climb it.
Thanks guys,
Matt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Unless you can buy an off the shelf adapter kit for the
motor-transmission combination your idea of no machine work required
is out the window. If you direct drive the differential you will
probably need a much more powerful motor controller combination or a
dual motor arrangement with series parallel drive control and
reversing contactors for the motor. Perhaps the school has a machine
shop and the adapter could be a project for them. me
On 7/10/07, Matthew Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi guys, just one more question for the moment. I've been using uve's
calculator today and it says that I can have a 91 mile range at
100km/h (60m/h)! How accurate is this calculator? Does it account for
losses due to acceleration/deceleration, etc? If this is true, I might
not need to change the donor vehicle after all, assuming that the
vehicle can hold 1500lbs of batteries.
Also, when the range is calculated, does it use 100%DOD, or 80% or
something else? I'd need to factor that into the battery since I want
maximum cycle life.
Lastly, I seem to be getting the best range at 1st gear for
everything. The mercedes service rep said that it is possible to
change the gears on the differential box. How difficult is this to do
normally? I'd like to make use of the other gears as well, so if I
actually ran into a hill, it would be possible to climb it.
Thanks guys,
Matt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I now have a large pack of SAFT NiCad batteries, placed in service by
Dodge in 1993. They are still in the original vehicle, a Dodge
Caravan (or TEVan as they were called). I'm sure there is an
equalizing regime to follow in charging them, but I have a few
questions.
Is it hard on the NiCad's to equalize by overcharging them
occasionally? Will it significantly extend the pack's life to charge
individually the batteries that are low?
Is there a particular battery management system available today that
is a big improvement over the original 1993 system?
Thanks for any help you can give me.
Jerry
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Assault with batteries
:)
Lock
human-electric hybrid pedestrian
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The quote below is from a very old (Feb. 19, 1999!) post by Otmar. What
exactly is meant by "speed reducers" in the nose? Is there a link where I
can see a picture of them?
Thanks.
>On the topic of high performancing a Tropica, Bob Schneevieww suggests:
>"Two 8"s with 5 to 1 speed reducers in the nose, driving driveshafts direct
>to the hubs.
Bill Dennis
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tom S. wrote:
> The Evette weighs about a 1000lbs, it will hold up to 40
> orbitals at about 40lbs a piece, about 1600lbs, thats about a
> 1.6/1 radio, that should give me well over a 100mi a charge
> at 40mph. Yout thoughts?
The conventional metric is the ratio of battery to total vehicle weight,
or in this case 1600/2600 = ~60% of the vehicle weight in batteries.
This is a very good ratio and should allow a good range. It is
difficult to estimate what sort of range your vehicle might achieve
since it is of unconventional configuration (standard rules of thumb
likely don't apply), and you haven't provided any data on what your
actual energy usage is.
In general you should expect less range from 1600lbs of AGMs than an
equivalent weight in flooded batteries. With your dual Curtii, the 40
Orbitals would need to be configured either as a 4-wide 120V 200Ah pack
or a pair of 2-wide (buddy-paired) 120V 100Ah strings.
If we assume your vehicle uses about 200Wh/mi @ 40mph, then it would be
consuming about 70A @ 120V, or 17.5A/battery. This is pretty close to
the 25A value at which the Orbital's reserve capacity rating is
specified.
At the 25A rate, the Orbital is rated for 100min (under ideal conditions
and to 100% DOD). If your EV draws 25A from each Orbital at 40mph, you
could run for 100min or about 67mi. If you did this very often, your
battery pack would be murdered as AGMs do not last long when cycled
deeply. More realistically, you could routinely use about 50% of their
available capacity, and occasionally 80%.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Planetary gearset attached to the the front of the motor case?
Z
On 7/10/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The quote below is from a very old (Feb. 19, 1999!) post by Otmar. What
exactly is meant by "speed reducers" in the nose? Is there a link where I
can see a picture of them?
Thanks.
>On the topic of high performancing a Tropica, Bob Schneevieww suggests:
>"Two 8"s with 5 to 1 speed reducers in the nose, driving driveshafts direct
>to the hubs.
Bill Dennis
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
--
Zeke Yewdall
Chief Electrical Engineer
Sunflower Solar, A NewPoint Energy Company
Cell: 720.352.2508
Office: 303.459.0177
FAX documents to: 720.269.1240
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.cosunflower.com
CoSEIA Certified
Certified BP Solar Installer
National Association of Home Builders
Quotable Quote
"In the dark of the moon, in flying snow,
in the dead of winter, war spreading,
families dying, the world in danger,
I walk the rocky hillside
sowing clover."
Wendell Berry
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think he was referring to a 5:1 gear box on each 8" motor driving each drive
shaft, all this located in the nose of the vehicle.
The website indicates here a 5.2:1 belt reduction that direct drives the wheels
http://www.tropicaev.org/
----- Original Message -----
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:27 pm
Subject: Speed Reducers in the Nose
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> The quote below is from a very old (Feb. 19, 1999!) post by Otmar.
> Whatexactly is meant by "speed reducers" in the nose? Is there a
> link where I
> can see a picture of them?
>
> Thanks.
>
> >On the topic of high performancing a Tropica, Bob Schneevieww
> suggests:
> >"Two 8"s with 5 to 1 speed reducers in the nose, driving
> driveshafts direct
> >to the hubs.
>
> Bill Dennis
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sounds like a gearmotor setup, which is simply a fixed-ratio reduction
transmission bolted to the face of a motor.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The quote below is from a very old (Feb. 19, 1999!) post by Otmar. What
exactly is meant by "speed reducers" in the nose? Is there a link where I
can see a picture of them?
Thanks.
On the topic of high performancing a Tropica, Bob Schneevieww suggests:
"Two 8"s with 5 to 1 speed reducers in the nose, driving driveshafts direct
to the hubs.
Bill Dennis
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rodger,
Because this car is not a 4wheeler, but more like a two wheeler I think the
rolling resistance is up to 30% less.What do you think?
Many of the parts a gas car we don`t.
Ton Sines
-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Jul 10, 2007 5:36 PM
>To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>Subject: RE: conversion question
>
>Tom S. wrote:
>
>> The Evette weighs about a 1000lbs, it will hold up to 40
>> orbitals at about 40lbs a piece, about 1600lbs, thats about a
>> 1.6/1 radio, that should give me well over a 100mi a charge
>> at 40mph. Yout thoughts?
>
>The conventional metric is the ratio of battery to total vehicle weight,
>or in this case 1600/2600 = ~60% of the vehicle weight in batteries.
>
>This is a very good ratio and should allow a good range. It is
>difficult to estimate what sort of range your vehicle might achieve
>since it is of unconventional configuration (standard rules of thumb
>likely don't apply), and you haven't provided any data on what your
>actual energy usage is.
>
>In general you should expect less range from 1600lbs of AGMs than an
>equivalent weight in flooded batteries. With your dual Curtii, the 40
>Orbitals would need to be configured either as a 4-wide 120V 200Ah pack
>or a pair of 2-wide (buddy-paired) 120V 100Ah strings.
>
>If we assume your vehicle uses about 200Wh/mi @ 40mph, then it would be
>consuming about 70A @ 120V, or 17.5A/battery. This is pretty close to
>the 25A value at which the Orbital's reserve capacity rating is
>specified.
>
>At the 25A rate, the Orbital is rated for 100min (under ideal conditions
>and to 100% DOD). If your EV draws 25A from each Orbital at 40mph, you
>could run for 100min or about 67mi. If you did this very often, your
>battery pack would be murdered as AGMs do not last long when cycled
>deeply. More realistically, you could routinely use about 50% of their
>available capacity, and occasionally 80%.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Roger.
>
________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
MIKE WILLMON wrote:
> I think he was referring to a 5:1 gear box on each 8" motor
> driving each drive shaft, all this located in the nose of
> the vehicle.
>
> The website indicates here a 5.2:1 belt reduction that direct
> drives the wheels http://www.tropicaev.org/
If you look closely at the photos of the front and rear suspension on
this site (<http://www.tropicaev.org/tphotos.html>), you'll notice that
the Tropica is RWD, with each rear wheel powered by its own ADC6.7"
motor via a toothed belt fixed reduction system.
What Bob S. suggests is a using an ADC8" per rear wheel, with 5:1 gear
reduction mounted on the nose *of the motor*, so that each motor may
"directly" drive a halfshaft to its wheel.
The Tropica's batteries are contained in a 'T'-shaped tray that slides
out the front of the car for access, so it would be very difficult to
convert this car to FWD (and that would be an unlikely recommendation
for hotrodding it ;^)
As to Bill's original question; no idea what 5:1 reducers Bob S. may
have had in mind. A planetary gearset of some sort is likely to allow a
package compact enough to fit on the face of an ADC8".
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Must be PM.
If it were a shunt, you would have the same effect as
with a series motor: reversing the polarity will still
turn it the same direction, as both field and armature
reverse polarity, so the forces are identical.
PM has its magnets always in the same direction, so
reversing the current turns it the opposite direction.
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 Tim Humphrey
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 12:48 PM
To: EV
Subject: Stupid question....
OK, my turn to ask a stupid question.
I have a Baldor motor, the nameplate says DC Motor, 74V 2200RPM, 1.5HP
It doesn't specify if it is series, shunt, or permanent magnet.
It only has two 14ga. leads and swapping polarity on them causes the motor
to reverse direction. the RPM is pretty tightly matched to the applied
voltage. So I'm pretty confident it is not series wound.
Turning the 5/8" motor shaft produces a voltage on the leads that varies
with speed. However, I cannot detect any evidence of cogging.
Only 8 volts applied creates enough torque that I cannot hold the motor
shaft from turning with my bare hand. (I'm not considered weak either)
Does this sound like a PM or Shunt motor?
Why is that a stupid question?? Because I could probably just look up the
motor part number and it would tell me. However, I can remember all of the
above crap, but have no idea what the motor part number is. (It's at home,
I'm not)
--
Stay Charged!
Hump
I-5, Blossvale NY
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tom S. wrote:
> Because this car is not a 4wheeler, but more like a two
> wheeler I think the rolling resistance is up to 30% less.What
> do you think?
> Many of the parts a gas car we don`t.
As a two wheeler you will 'save' the losses associated with the wheel
bearing and brake drag on the missing front wheels. You will also save
any rolling losses assoicated with non-ideal front end alignment ;^>
Actual rolling resistance is going to be at least as great as a 4
wheeler. The tires have some rolling resistance factor, which can be
translated into a drag force as a fraction of the weight they are
supporting. Say the coefficient of rolling resistance is 0.01; this
means there will be 1lb of drag for every 100lbs on the wheel. If your
two wheels have the same coefficient of rolling resistance as those on a
typical 4-wheeled conversion of similar weight, then the drag due to
rolling resistance will be the same. However, the wheels in the
pictures of your vehicle look like they would be significantly greater
rolling resistance than those of the typical conversion.
I'm not even sure that you would save significantly on the brake drag;
since you have only two wheels to stop a similar weight vehicle, you may
need larger brakes and their drag may be similar to those of all 4
wheels on a convnetional car. Do you use disks or drums? A typical
conversion will have front disks and rear drums; most of the brake drag
(and there may not be very much) will be due to the disks, so if you
have disks your brake drag may be virtually the same as a tyipcal
4-wheeler.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Jul 9, 2007, at 4:11 AM, Richard Acuti wrote:
Last night, when I went to Annapolis, I averaged 33 mph @ 65 amps
* 135 volts= 8.8kW (rounded up) 1st gear.
This morning's commute on the highway I averaged 55 mph @ 90 amps
*130 volts= 11.7kW. 2nd gear.
Like I said, without an E-meter it's kind of hard to be perfectly
accurate due to all the low-grade hills around here. My inbound
commute is definitely an overall uphill pull but I used a pretty
level stretch to get the 11.7kW number.
The 55 mph numbers look pretty good, around 212 watt hours per mile.
The Beetle is not exactly aerodynamic. Even my 1420 lb. VW based
beach buggy only manages 260 to 270 watt hours per mile at that
speed. The buggy is even less aerodynamic (estimated to have a cd
around 0.6.)
What I notice is that the watt hours per mile at 33 mph is higher
than at 55 mph. I suspect that 1st gear is just to low and you need
to slow the motor down some (its not often we say that to new EVers -
usually the opposite.) In my buggy I don't even use 1st gear (though
with a heavier EV its a good idea.) The buggy runs around 170 to 180
watt hours per mile at 35 mph.
Synthetic gear oil really helps the VW transaxle. You shouldn't use
GL-5 gear oil in the air cooled VW transaxle. You need to stick with
GL-4. I don't think you will find any significant gains with moderate
lightening though it will make hill climbing easier. A couple
hundered pounds has little effect on the power required to go a
steady speed on a level road (it effects the power required to
accelerate and climb grades.) The biggest reason to shave weight is
to help the poor little VW brakes. Make sure you have a 4 wheel
alignment and that it was done after the conversion (at the current
weight.) The stock toe-in spec for the front tires can be reduced to
almost zero with little effect on the drivability and will save
power. Worn rear bushings are not good for efficiency and unless they
have been replaced they are likely near the end of their life. (I
prefer the old swing axle style but I doubt its much more efficient,
perhaps even less efficient)
The old VWs are a simple car designed for efficiency; however, it is
a design of another era. Its not the most efficient thing out there
(but the more aerodynamic ghia body gets you pretty close.) It is one
of the most fun though :-)
HTH,
Paul "neon" G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rodger,
I disagree. I can push my car easily with one hand of a level street, I don`t
think you can do that with a standard car. I`ve been testing this car for
years,and could make many claims, however without an official it wood be
meaningless, so i`ll just stick to the facts about the car.OK
Tom Sines
-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Jul 10, 2007 6:28 PM
>To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>Subject: RE: conversion question
>
>Tom S. wrote:
>
>> Because this car is not a 4wheeler, but more like a two
>> wheeler I think the rolling resistance is up to 30% less.What
>> do you think?
>> Many of the parts a gas car we don`t.
>
>As a two wheeler you will 'save' the losses associated with the wheel
>bearing and brake drag on the missing front wheels. You will also save
>any rolling losses assoicated with non-ideal front end alignment ;^>
>
>Actual rolling resistance is going to be at least as great as a 4
>wheeler. The tires have some rolling resistance factor, which can be
>translated into a drag force as a fraction of the weight they are
>supporting. Say the coefficient of rolling resistance is 0.01; this
>means there will be 1lb of drag for every 100lbs on the wheel. If your
>two wheels have the same coefficient of rolling resistance as those on a
>typical 4-wheeled conversion of similar weight, then the drag due to
>rolling resistance will be the same. However, the wheels in the
>pictures of your vehicle look like they would be significantly greater
>rolling resistance than those of the typical conversion.
>
>I'm not even sure that you would save significantly on the brake drag;
>since you have only two wheels to stop a similar weight vehicle, you may
>need larger brakes and their drag may be similar to those of all 4
>wheels on a convnetional car. Do you use disks or drums? A typical
>conversion will have front disks and rear drums; most of the brake drag
>(and there may not be very much) will be due to the disks, so if you
>have disks your brake drag may be virtually the same as a tyipcal
>4-wheeler.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Roger.
>
________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Fewer wheels means that the bearings are carrying more weight per wheel,
this increases rolling resistance per wheel.
Typically big fat wheels will have more rolling resistance than skinny ones.
So you have fewer wheels with higher resistance per wheel.
Overall, maybe it's less, maybe it's more. Impossible to be sure without
measuring.
> Hi Rodger,
>
> Because this car is not a 4wheeler, but more like a two wheeler I think
> the rolling resistance is up to 30% less.What do you think?
> Many of the parts a gas car we don`t.
>
> Ton Sines
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Jul 10, 2007 5:36 PM
>>To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>>Subject: RE: conversion question
>>
>>Tom S. wrote:
>>
>>> The Evette weighs about a 1000lbs, it will hold up to 40
>>> orbitals at about 40lbs a piece, about 1600lbs, thats about a
>>> 1.6/1 radio, that should give me well over a 100mi a charge
>>> at 40mph. Yout thoughts?
>>
>>The conventional metric is the ratio of battery to total vehicle weight,
>>or in this case 1600/2600 = ~60% of the vehicle weight in batteries.
>>
>>This is a very good ratio and should allow a good range. It is
>>difficult to estimate what sort of range your vehicle might achieve
>>since it is of unconventional configuration (standard rules of thumb
>>likely don't apply), and you haven't provided any data on what your
>>actual energy usage is.
>>
>>In general you should expect less range from 1600lbs of AGMs than an
>>equivalent weight in flooded batteries. With your dual Curtii, the 40
>>Orbitals would need to be configured either as a 4-wide 120V 200Ah pack
>>or a pair of 2-wide (buddy-paired) 120V 100Ah strings.
>>
>>If we assume your vehicle uses about 200Wh/mi @ 40mph, then it would be
>>consuming about 70A @ 120V, or 17.5A/battery. This is pretty close to
>>the 25A value at which the Orbital's reserve capacity rating is
>>specified.
>>
>>At the 25A rate, the Orbital is rated for 100min (under ideal conditions
>>and to 100% DOD). If your EV draws 25A from each Orbital at 40mph, you
>>could run for 100min or about 67mi. If you did this very often, your
>>battery pack would be murdered as AGMs do not last long when cycled
>>deeply. More realistically, you could routinely use about 50% of their
>>available capacity, and occasionally 80%.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Roger.
>>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> PeoplePC Online
> A better way to Internet
> http://www.peoplepc.com
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Many people on the list can push their car with one hand. I seem to recall
one (John Wayland?) or two mentioning they could do it with one finger.
So I'd say that evidence is inconclusive.
> Hi Rodger,
>
> I disagree. I can push my car easily with one hand of a level street, I
> don`t think you can do that with a standard car. I`ve been testing this
> car for years,and could make many claims, however without an official it
> wood be meaningless, so i`ll just stick to the facts about the car.OK
>
> Tom Sines
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Jul 10, 2007 6:28 PM
>>To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>>Subject: RE: conversion question
>>
>>Tom S. wrote:
>>
>>> Because this car is not a 4wheeler, but more like a two
>>> wheeler I think the rolling resistance is up to 30% less.What
>>> do you think?
>>> Many of the parts a gas car we don`t.
>>
>>As a two wheeler you will 'save' the losses associated with the wheel
>>bearing and brake drag on the missing front wheels. You will also save
>>any rolling losses assoicated with non-ideal front end alignment ;^>
>>
>>Actual rolling resistance is going to be at least as great as a 4
>>wheeler. The tires have some rolling resistance factor, which can be
>>translated into a drag force as a fraction of the weight they are
>>supporting. Say the coefficient of rolling resistance is 0.01; this
>>means there will be 1lb of drag for every 100lbs on the wheel. If your
>>two wheels have the same coefficient of rolling resistance as those on a
>>typical 4-wheeled conversion of similar weight, then the drag due to
>>rolling resistance will be the same. However, the wheels in the
>>pictures of your vehicle look like they would be significantly greater
>>rolling resistance than those of the typical conversion.
>>
>>I'm not even sure that you would save significantly on the brake drag;
>>since you have only two wheels to stop a similar weight vehicle, you may
>>need larger brakes and their drag may be similar to those of all 4
>>wheels on a convnetional car. Do you use disks or drums? A typical
>>conversion will have front disks and rear drums; most of the brake drag
>>(and there may not be very much) will be due to the disks, so if you
>>have disks your brake drag may be virtually the same as a tyipcal
>>4-wheeler.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Roger.
>>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> PeoplePC Online
> A better way to Internet
> http://www.peoplepc.com
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sounds like a PM motor.
You can reduce/elliminate cogging by twisting the coil slots on the
armature. I.e. instead of going parallel to the axis, they spiral
slightly.
>
> OK, my turn to ask a stupid question.
>
> I have a Baldor motor, the nameplate says DC Motor, 74V 2200RPM, 1.5HP
>
> It doesn't specify if it is series, shunt, or permanent magnet.
>
> It only has two 14ga. leads and swapping polarity on them causes the motor
> to reverse direction. the RPM is pretty tightly matched to the applied
> voltage. So I'm pretty confident it is not series wound.
>
> Turning the 5/8" motor shaft produces a voltage on the leads that varies
> with speed. However, I cannot detect any evidence of cogging.
>
> Only 8 volts applied creates enough torque that I cannot hold the motor
> shaft from turning with my bare hand. (I'm not considered weak either)
>
>
> Does this sound like a PM or Shunt motor?
>
> Why is that a stupid question?? Because I could probably just look up the
> motor part number and it would tell me. However, I can remember all of the
> above crap, but have no idea what the motor part number is. (It's at home,
> I'm not)
>
>
> --
> Stay Charged!
> Hump
> I-5, Blossvale NY
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tom S. wrote:
> I disagree. I can push my car easily with one hand of a level
> street, I don`t think you can do that with a standard car.
Find yourself a standard car and surprise yourself. ;^>
My ~2000lb EV pushes easily with one hand on level ground; good
conversions push easily with as little as one finger.
If you know the actual weight of the vehicle you can determine the
rolling drag by pulling the vehicle on a level surface using an accurate
spring scale. The scale indicates the force in pounds required to move
the vehicle; this figure divided by the weight of the vehicle in lbs
yields the coefficient of rolling drag (taking into account bearing and
brake drag as well).
> I`ve been testing this car for years,and could make many
> claims, however without an official it wood be meaningless,
> so i`ll just stick to the facts about the car.OK
Problem is that without actual numbers to back them up your facts are
not particularly meaningful either. If you've been testing this vehicle
for years you must have some actual data on its energy consumption.
Even if you haven't got an E-Meter or similar revice installed to allow
direct measurement of the Wh/mi consumption, you could at least tell us
what make and how many batteries you actually use and how far you are
able to travel on a charge.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I'm looking into the use of the zilla or curtis motor controllers, and
> I'm having difficulty in matching up a motor with a controller. What
> does a 1000A controller mean anyways? Is that a nominal or a maximum
> rating? Also, where is the maximum A rating for a motor? I can't seem
> to find one.
Go with (at least) the Zilla 1K. The ratings are maximum current for the
controller and typically continuous current for the motor.
For series wound motors, current equals torque. More available current
means better acceleration.
If you use a curtis controller in your Mercedes, your acceleration will be
lethargic. Perhaps a little slower than an old VW micro bus.
Motors don't typically list a "maximum" current, because how much current
they can handle depends on how long it is applied.
A 200A continuous motor might handle 230 amps for an hour, 400 amps for 15
minutes, 1,000 amps for 2 minutes, 2,000 amps for 20 seconds, etc.
Note: please don't assume these numbers have any basis in reality, I just
made them up as an example.
You don't have to worry about "matching" controllers to motors with series
wound systems. You won't be able to run max current for very long anyway,
unless you are climbing a long, steep hill.
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Hi guys, just one more question for the moment. I've been using uve's
> calculator today and it says that I can have a 91 mile range at
> 100km/h (60m/h)! How accurate is this calculator? Does it account for
> losses due to acceleration/deceleration, etc? If this is true, I might
> not need to change the donor vehicle after all, assuming that the
> vehicle can hold 1500lbs of batteries.
Accuracy is fair to middlen. Range figures do NOT take acceleration into
account, they are for a steady speed with no stops.
>
> Also, when the range is calculated, does it use 100%DOD, or 80% or
100% DoD and even then are only close to accurate for a new pack.
Also, unless you change the values, this assumes no wind and flat ground.
Change the incline to 4% and see what happens when you hit mild hills.
> Lastly, I seem to be getting the best range at 1st gear for
> everything. The mercedes service rep said that it is possible to
Look at the motor RPMs. The sweet spot (efficiency) on most, EV size,
series wound motors is around 3000-4000.
The calculator uses simple equations to model the motor. These equations
are more accurate at the middle of the curve than they are towards the
edges. I.e. they are more accurate when the motor is near it's sweet
spot.
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OOohhh, "ON the nose"
not "IN the nose",
But the pic does show the belt drive referred to ;-)
I wonder if those Rotax 3:1 gear boxes could be adapted to an 8"/9" end housing?
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 2:19 pm
Subject: RE: Speed Reducers in the Nose
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> MIKE WILLMON wrote:
>
> > I think he was referring to a 5:1 gear box on each 8" motor
> > driving each drive shaft, all this located in the nose of
> > the vehicle.
> >
> > The website indicates here a 5.2:1 belt reduction that direct
> > drives the wheels http://www.tropicaev.org/
>
> If you look closely at the photos of the front and rear suspension on
> this site (<http://www.tropicaev.org/tphotos.html>), you'll notice
> thatthe Tropica is RWD, with each rear wheel powered by its own
> ADC6.7"motor via a toothed belt fixed reduction system.
>
> What Bob S. suggests is a using an ADC8" per rear wheel, with 5:1 gear
> reduction mounted on the nose *of the motor*, so that each motor may
> "directly" drive a halfshaft to its wheel.
>
> The Tropica's batteries are contained in a 'T'-shaped tray that slides
> out the front of the car for access, so it would be very difficult to
> convert this car to FWD (and that would be an unlikely recommendation
> for hotrodding it ;^)
>
> As to Bill's original question; no idea what 5:1 reducers Bob S. may
> have had in mind. A planetary gearset of some sort is likely to
> allow a
> package compact enough to fit on the face of an ADC8".
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is from the Deka battery manual:
Typical* VRLA Battery Cycling Ability vs. Depth of Discharge
Typical Life Cycles
Capacity Withdrawn
Gel AGM
100% 450 150
80% 600 200
50% 1000 370
25% 2100 925
10% 5700 3100
So If I ran gels to 100%DOD I would have more life than AGM's at 50%DOD???
On 6/30/07, Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tehben,
No doubt his supplier is John Gonzolas at Auto Electric & Battery. He has the
Alaska EVA set up with an account and will give you
the good guy pricing if you mention you're a member of the AlaskaEVA group.
Baically what it comes down to is you'll pay their
wholesale price plus a very small markup and they pick up the shipping (which
can be $30-$40 a battery) with their normal stock
orders that come in every couple weeks. If you want I can give you John's
contact info and you can talk to him directly. He can
either hold them for you if you want to pick them up or help you make
arrangements to truck them down. I'd be hapy to help in
that regard as well, except my truck would barely make it to Girdwood :-( I
was originally going with the Deka Gels but talked
myself into the better performance for the first run. I may go back to him for
gells when I'm done with this set of flooded Crown
batteries.
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Tehben Dean
> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 9:36 AM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Re: AGM vs Gel
>
>
> I was just in a local alternator and battery shop to see what was
> available. He does carry Deka's, so if I do go with the gels I can get
> them from him.
> anyways he called his supplier in Anchorage to get a price quote on
> the AGM and Gel Deka's and told the guy what I was going to use them
> for. His supplier recommended Gel for an EV <shrug> he also gave him
> the name of a guy I should contact who is an EV specialist in
> Anchorage, named Mike Willmon :D
>
> When buying so many batteries does it make sense to try and get them
> from the supplier at wholesale cost.. is it even possible?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Tehben
> '90 Toyota 4x4 Pickup
> 'hElix EV'
> evalbum: http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1225
>
>
--
Tehben
'90 Toyota 4x4 Pickup
'hElix EV'
evalbum: http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1225
--- End Message ---
