Author Topic: Our Test Mule  (Read 51955 times)

Offline piotrsko

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
  • Country: us
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #300 on: January 03, 2015, 07:50:24 AM »
Make a full belly pan and really increase the aerodynamic efficiency

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #301 on: January 04, 2015, 09:00:51 AM »
"Make a full belly pan and really increase the aerodynamic efficiency"

Ya, but at my age, working with my hands over my head for so long would be my real test....LOL
 :O):
Miz
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #302 on: January 16, 2015, 05:25:26 PM »
Sorry to be taking so long, but the holidays were a little hectic. 

We should be getting back to work in February  2015
Miz
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #303 on: March 03, 2015, 03:02:58 PM »
UPDATE:
___________________________________________________________________________ _______________________

At this point, the motor is wound and Ivan has determined that the slot top sticks are too small and might allow
 a wire to poke out (Not a good thing I am told...LOL)  So, A larger size set is on order.  It might take a couple of weeks.

Then the motor leads can be attached, the phase papers can be inserted, the wire returns carefully beaten into shape
and tied with motor string.  I think (and I might be wrong) that Ivan will do a dyno pull at that time, before he encases it in resin. 

After he makes sure it is operating as expected, it can be dipped and baked in his custom made oven.

The last operation would be to cut the splines for the slip yoke.

After I get it, I will case harden it as I did the first motor.  There was no wear at all on the first motor,
but the second motor did wear a little as I had not hardened it (I assume) and it became just a tad loose.

If it runs half as good as Ivan's beautiful water cooled motor in his truck, I will be in heaven.

NOTE:  To get optimum torque and power from a custom motor, You MUST have your controller re-flashed with open software. 
It allows perfect tuning of the motor instead of being locked into parameter settings that limit performance.  (Having now
experienced it, I wish I had this software with the AC50.  I am sure it would have made a difference.)

Miz
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #304 on: May 25, 2015, 05:03:03 AM »
It is now May 25th.  Ivan and I have been busy with life stuff and not progressed much on the new motor. 
There is only a few slots that need sticks, the motor leads need soldered on, the phase papers added then
it needs to be string tied before the varnish is applied and baked.

The last item is the re-machining of the output shaft. It needs turned down to the powerglide diameter and
spline d  to take the old PG slip yoke. 

I am looking forward to driving it and am curious to the HP/TQ difference.

Miz   
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #305 on: June 16, 2015, 10:32:36 PM »
It is now June 16th.  Life has ganged up on Ivan and me and we have made no real progress. 

Sometimes I think there is a conspiracy to kill all EV projects.

Miz
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline piotrsko

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
  • Country: us
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #306 on: June 17, 2015, 06:00:47 AM »
Been following 2 threads about bigger vids.  Eldis in diyE, Paul H in ecomodder.  Causes me to wonder what would happen if you had access to a 500amp controller with your motor.

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #307 on: June 17, 2015, 10:24:16 AM »
It would be heaven, but It would need a second pack to utilize it.  The present controller is capable of pulling down this pack to 2.5 volts per cell, even on a full charge.
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline piotrsko

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
  • Country: us
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #308 on: June 18, 2015, 06:11:12 AM »
You know I have a chevy pack split in half and paralleled?  At around 850 amps I'm showing 2.03 which hasn't  killed the pack in 16 months, as long as it bounces back after I get off it.   I am more worried about the kostov brushes.

Offline mizlplix

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Country: us
  • "The more you look, the more you find."
    • The old  build thread....
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #309 on: June 21, 2015, 02:09:50 AM »
Ya, ,I know what you mean, I dont worry too much about the sag, just the sitting voltage too.

To date, the little green car has been setting around 8 months.  The pack is just sitting there and taking it well.  as it should of course. 
It is the aux battery system that takes maintanence.  It runs dead in two weeks if I don't run a 2 amp overnite charge cycle.  It has at least two systems running full time, The Amp gauge and the BMS boards.  Each draws less than .3 amp but takes it's toll.

Every two weeks I walk by to hear a faint whistling noise and realize it is the aux battery LOW signal from the BMS headboard crying for a charge "or else".  I could just turn it off at the aux power emergency switch but it just gives me the realization that the car is still alive and needs some maintenance.

If driven at least one 5 mile trip one day per two week period, this does not even happen.

Once per 6 months I run a charge top off cycle of the main pack,  I never gets beyond the over the knee portion and runs maybe 12-15 minutes at a floating voltage.

A decent pack health I have come to realize.

Miz

PS:  Since they were new, I have done the following:

1- Received the cells in the freight shipment. Lined them up and paralleled them in series for two weeks.  Although they measured within .017 volt spread, their real amp capacity spread was much, much different.

2- at 1 month of running hard motor test cycles, I spent 3 days with a 5 amp lithium charger equalizing the cells a little closer.

3- at one year, I spent 3 more days chasing the low cells , again bringing them even closer to even.  I paid $450 for the bare bones cell board with a small head board analog BMS system.  Installed it and enabled the 5 watt top balance feature.  I watched it work every daily charge and it did work to even up the top balance closer.

4- One year later, I did another manual balance of  1 day to bring up 10 of the lowest cells, which were maybe ,008 volt low.

5- NOW: 6 months later, as I watch the cell boards when the charger shuts off, I see 28 of the 38 cell boards go red, (Doing the 5 watt top balance.  The other ten cells are maybe .006 volt apart. (not worth chasing.

At this point my 1,900 Lb non aerodynamic car gets about 60 miles per charge comfortably. 

BTW: the last time I went to the 60 mile point, a quick voltage check, the cells reported two of them were .01 volt or so lower than the rest.  Those would be the smallest capacity of the pack and still were 132 AH and over the purchased size.  If I were to then bottom balance the pack, it would just shut off the charger that .01 volt early.

So in reality, to me, the whole top/bottom balance deal is moot as the pack is regulated by the weakest cell in it.  In both systems I would drive to the 3.1 volt per cell point and stop as I have about 3 miles left after that point in my pack.  A lesson I had to learn after the car was built, by experience. 

Once when I had it bottom balanced, I could get 4 miles after the 3.1 volt per cell point. ......... Not worth the 3 days per year I spent when I can allow an automated system watch and protect the pack for me at no extra labor. (Just my opinion)

And finally yes, If I really had balanced my pack individually with a small charger, cell by cell, to .006 Volts per cell in the first place, instead of assuming the parallel ing was close, I could/would run without a BMS just fine. (Knowing now that I have a decently grouped bunch of cells).
1930 Ford Speedster, AC50, full manual powerglide, 6.14gears, 38-130AH CALBs.

Offline piotrsko

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
  • Country: us
Re: Our Test Mule
« Reply #310 on: June 21, 2015, 05:48:58 AM »
You have just validated my opinion on the Volt pack.

Keep the top and bottom Voltages conservative and the whole bms thing is a waste of time.  Every so often go look at single cell voltages  At the bottom to see if one is dying.