# A123 cells coming to EV Components



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

EV Components is working on getting a bulk purchase going with the A123 cells. 
These are the brand new and real 2.3 AH cells at 70 C.

If you have an interest, please email me at [email protected].
Let me know approximately what you are looking for in terms of quantity.

We are trying to figure out the level of interest in this product.

I don't have exact pricing yet because we are still negotiating. 
But as is our history, we will be the lowest price around on batteries.


----------



## dexion (Aug 22, 2009)

Interest. I am in the planning stages for batts now.


----------



## neanderthal (Jul 24, 2008)

Very sweet. I am interested for sure. I am actually not sure about the timeline. I don't know if I will be able to buy some right away or if it is a year or so down the road, I just wanna be clear about that as to not give you guys the wrong numbers.

I would probably end up purchasing about 8 or 9 kw worth, though


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

Are you seeking just the raw cells at the best price possible? 

Or are you seeking to have them put together at a higher cost per cell to account for that?

The purpose of my question is just to see what A123 customers would be most interested in. I don't have numbers yet on price, so don't ask, but I think we will have the best price out there.


----------



## dexion (Aug 22, 2009)

I am looking at cost vs performance. That being said, if I could get it assembled in a pack to my specifications that has value to me as well.

So the answer is really it depends on how much extra and what exactly would be included in an assembled pack.


----------



## neanderthal (Jul 24, 2008)

Raw cells vs in a pack? Well... I am willing to assemble them into a pack on my own, but if the price difference is not too huge, I would very willingly pay to have it done.

I guess what I'm saying is that I, myself, would prefer to have the option.

I understand that cell assembly is time consuming and should not be expected for free.


----------



## Drew (Jul 26, 2009)

I'd be very interested if you were able to get your hands on some larger format cells, either the 32 size cells or the prismatic 20Ah.


----------



## jorhyne (Aug 20, 2008)

Perhaps if you sold some premade configurations such as 3.3v 20ah-100ah, basically offer a lot of the same sizing that you have for thundersky but just with premade packs. 

That would save your customers most of the work, but hopefully would still offer some cost savings as you could just mass produce certain configurations as opposed to building a custom pack for each individual order.


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

jorhyne said:


> Perhaps if you sold some premade configurations such as 3.3v 20ah-100ah, basically offer a lot of the same sizing that you have for thundersky but just with premade packs.
> 
> That would save your customers most of the work, but hopefully would still offer some cost savings as you could just mass produce certain configurations as opposed to building a custom pack for each individual order.


+1 on a great idea, albeit from our customer point of view...


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

jorhyne said:


> Perhaps if you sold some premade configurations such as 3.3v 20ah-100ah, basically offer a lot of the same sizing that you have for thundersky but just with premade packs.
> 
> That would save your customers most of the work, but hopefully would still offer some cost savings as you could just mass produce certain configurations as opposed to building a custom pack for each individual order.


That is exactly what we are discussing doing. Just trying to figure out the costs and our minimum profit for this process. Then if the price we are offering sounds interesting, we will do it.

Imagine the A123 cells at 70 C being offered in a 50 AH module. What would be the ideal size? 20 AH? 100 AH?


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

EVComponents said:


> That is exactly what we are discussing doing. Just trying to figure out the costs and our minimum profit for this process. Then if the price we are offering sounds interesting, we will do it.
> 
> Imagine the A123 cells at 70 C being offered in a 50 AH module. What would be the ideal size? 20 AH? 100 AH?


I thought the cells were 50C max and someone mentioned they "like" to stay around 20-30C max safely, do you have some additional data about the 70C...

I think 40AH bricks would work... (20AH would work too obviously)

(1) 40AH * 50C = 2000A perfect for max output racers with 2000A or dual 1000A controllers.
(2) 40AH * 30C = 1200A perfect max (for conservative folks) for 1000A controllers

3.3V * 91 cells = 300V
2.3AH * 18 = 40AH 
12kw (50C = 600kw) 252 lb. Race pack

Combine this pack with your Warp-11HV and the Zilla Z2K to make a Racer Package!


----------



## samborambo (Aug 27, 2008)

EVComponents said:


> EV Components is working on getting a bulk purchase going with the A123 cells.
> These are the brand new and real 2.3 AH cells at 70 C.
> 
> If you have an interest, please email me at [email protected].
> ...


I'm pretty sure the datasheet rates those cells as 70 Amps, not 70 C, continuous. Anyway, that's still an amazing 30 C continuous! Not really that usefull since the internal impedance causes the cell voltage at the terminals to drop to 2.2V at 70 A. That's 33% of the power given off as heat! There'll be a sweet-spot for maximum power transfer probably around 20C.

Sam.


----------



## samborambo (Aug 27, 2008)

samborambo said:


> I'm pretty sure the datasheet rates those cells as 70 Amps, not 70 C, continuous. Anyway, that's still an amazing 30 C continuous! Not really that usefull since the internal impedance causes the cell voltage at the terminals to drop to 2.2V at 70 A. That's 33% of the power given off as heat! There'll be a sweet-spot for maximum power transfer probably around 20C.
> 
> Sam.


Pfft. I'm half asleep! Sweet spot for maximum power transfer comes at 50% efficiency, of course. In this case, 102A is the most you'd ever want to draw from this cell to obtain maximum power. Any more than that and you'd be wasting more power in heat than electricity.

Still, the only vehicle you'd ever want to run at that efficiency is either a hybrid or a drag car. Running at 70A per cell, for every 100kW put down at the motor there's at least 50kW extra in heat developed in the battery pack!


----------



## jorhyne (Aug 20, 2008)

If you are only planning on doing one size then I say either a 20 or 50 AH pack, but I think having a 20, 40, 50, 60, 80, and 100 AH sizes would be ideal.

But I get a feeling that if you are offering brand new matched (resistance wise) A123 cells, they will sell in just about any configuration.

I know you said you are not really sure about pricing, when do you think you'll know? Any chance they will be cost-competitive with thundersky?


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

There performance surpasses thunder sky tremendously...kw(max C)/kg its no match....so the cost shouldn't be competitive...right?


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

jorhyne said:


> I know you said you are not really sure about pricing, when do you think you'll know? Any chance they will be cost-competitive with thundersky?


I am positive they will be more expensive than ThunderSky on a per AH basis.

But instead of being 3x more expensive per AH (like they are now), we hope to bring it down. It looks like the 2.3 AH cells are going for $6 to $8 now. I would really like to be able to offer the raw cells at $5 each.

We are trying to figure out the added cost for building them in 20 AH, 40 AH, 60 AH and 100 AH sizes, or as close as possible to those numbers.


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

samborambo said:


> I'm pretty sure the datasheet rates those cells as 70 Amps, not 70 C, continuous. Anyway, that's still an amazing 30 C continuous!


My apologies if I got the number wrong. This is a new product for me and I am just now researching it seriously.


----------



## RE Farmer (Aug 8, 2009)

dexion said:


> I am looking at cost vs performance. That being said, if I could get it assembled in a pack to my specifications that has value to me as well.
> 
> So the answer is really it depends on how much extra and what exactly would be included in an assembled pack.


I'm w/Dexion. I'm still in the planning stage, but would need to know the $/kwh. Since my glider is so small, fitting the TS format to the small space available to me requires some creative designing. If A123 are not orientation sensitive, it would make my pack design much easier.

While I would prefer something on the order of 100Ah modules, individual cells would give me maximum flexibility in laying out the pack. OTOH, getting all the individual cells reliably connected might be problematic.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

samborambo said:


> I'm pretty sure the datasheet rates those cells as 70 Amps, not 70 C, continuous. Anyway, that's still an amazing 30 C continuous!


Yes, I read that figure earlier today: 30C continuous or 70A (http://www.a123systems.com/products and select 26650 size). 120A peak for 10 seconds (52C).

Let's remember that 30C means discharging from 100% SOC to 0% SOC in 2 minutes, or 100% SOC to 20% SOC in 1 minute 36 seconds. The peak discharge rate of 52C would only last for 55 seconds (100->20% SOC).

So the 30C and 52C rates are interesting and very impressive numbers, but not practical for EVs unless you are racing (and recharging after at least every second 1/4 mile run).


----------



## neanderthal (Jul 24, 2008)

It also looks like they are offering different types of cells too. the m1, the m1ultra, and the m1 hd. With respectively higher power densities (and lower energy densities). I think they said their highest power density cell will do 35c continuous and 100c+ pulse.

I think that those cell would be awesome in a hybrid vehicle, or a drag or track car.

http://www.a123systems.com/technology/power


----------



## neanderthal (Jul 24, 2008)

They also claim that their high power density cells retain over 90 percent of their original capacity at 35c continuous discharge rate. So very little would go to heat with those particular cells. (see one of their graphs called "retained capacity..." on the link I posted above.

Killer stuff.


----------



## CroDriver (Jan 8, 2009)

James, I'm interested in 1.800 cells.

Are you sure that they are not "fake" or B class cells?


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

CroDriver said:


> James, I'm interested in 1.800 cells.
> 
> Are you sure that they are not "fake" or B class cells?


We are positive. This is the real thing. "A" class cells.


----------



## RE Farmer (Aug 8, 2009)

I Just looked at A123's site and they show they also have prismatic cells similar to TS and SE. Are you talking about these or the cylindrical cells or both? 

In either case, I would need at least 10kw, although 15kwh is preferred if I can afford it.


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

CroDriver said:


> James, I'm interested in 1.800 cells.
> 
> Are you sure that they are not "fake" or B class cells?


Your car is going to be insane!!


----------



## roflwaffle (Sep 9, 2008)

EVComponents said:


> I am positive they will be more expensive than ThunderSky on a per AH basis.
> 
> But instead of being 3x more expensive per AH (like they are now), we hope to bring it down. It looks like the 2.3 AH cells are going for $6 to $8 now. I would really like to be able to offer the raw cells at $5 each.
> 
> We are trying to figure out the added cost for building them in 20 AH, 40 AH, 60 AH and 100 AH sizes, or as close as possible to those numbers.


Holy cow! If y'all could offer TS cells for ~$650/kWh I'd be all over that once I wrangled up the cash.


----------



## Drew (Jul 26, 2009)

just did some calcs and $6 a cell works out to be approx $790/kWh nominal and $5 works out to be about $660/kWh nominal for bare cells, that would work out quite nicely for me.

How high a quality are you looking to go with the pack electronics if you did go for an integrated solution?


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

Your most popular LiFePO4 cell is the 100 AHr right? I bet that's a good prepackaged size to offer. Alternatively you could do 40 to 60 AHr cells packs for slightly more flexibility. Anything smaller reduces the value of prepackaged though (in my opinion).

Take my thoughts with a grain of salt though... I'm still playing with my new LiFePO4s and not shopping for different batteries!


----------



## Sutitan (Feb 23, 2009)

I think one thing you guys need to look at is who are going to buy these packs. so far, the only people in the DIY EV world to use A123 cells are people doing those bikes/scooters/motorcycles or a few go-karts. I bet there will be a few extreme EV's (looking at CroDriver) but not as many as TS of SE cells. I was planning on buying 45 60ah TS batteries, so i could achieve 1000amps at almost the TS's max C rating. But the mention of these cells have changed my build (small forumla type non-street build based off a type 1 chassis).

Anyways, if you guys do start offering these things at 5$ a cell (possibly slightly more pre-assembled) id be looking at

2.3ah * 9 cells in parallel = 20.7AH
3.3 * 44 (9 cells in parallel) in series = 145.2v 20.7ah

Basically 396 cells for a 144v 20ah pack. thats a pack id be willing to pay 2200 for (if not more, but i dont want to give you guys ideas  )

anyways, best of luck on getting these cells at the 5$ price. if you guys could achieve that, id be in line. btw, is there any possible date, or is it as soon as you guys can get the price?


----------



## MJ Monterey (Aug 20, 2009)

For my project his is a major bit of good news.

I have a large area in my project that is 4 inches deep. TS's shortest cell is 116mm (4 5/8 inches). Therefore I will be using either Headway or A123 cells because I can lay them on their side and use this space for batteries.


----------



## Sutitan (Feb 23, 2009)

I also think it would help if you guys (EVcomponents) welded the tabs onto the cells (unless they came like that from a123, which would be awesome). i know most of us DIYers dont have tab welders, and then we will go out and build DIY tab welders, and then make DIY explosions.



MJ Monterey said:


> I have a large area in my project that is 4 inches deep. TS's shortest cell is 116mm (4 5/8 inches).


Shortest is 190mm which is about 7 1/2 inches. think you were looking at width. not like it changes anything. just saying


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

We hope to have some solid news next week. Still working out the details on a large bulk purchase.


----------



## MJ Monterey (Aug 20, 2009)

Sutitan said:


> Shortest is 190mm which is about 7 1/2 inches. think you were looking at width. not like it changes anything. just saying


Looks like you are right.  But either way dragging on the ground or pushing up the seat the TSs do me no good.


----------



## Dan Frederiksen (Jul 26, 2007)

don't make them 3.3v modules though. who needs so low system voltage that 3.3V step is needed.
make them 40V 20Ah blocks for instance. otherwise the buyer will just have a harder time assembling them than if by cell because the series connection is a very big part of the interconnect. the parallel part is actually relatively low power. I would consider copper sheet with holes soldered onto the cells in a combined series/parallel bridge.
and if you encapsulate them to make them fancy, have little tabs for bms and parallel blocks connection.

let's say you make two products. a 40V 20Ah (12s9p) and a 40V 40Ah (12s18p) block it should be able to cover a good many solutions


----------



## CroDriver (Jan 8, 2009)

Dan Frederiksen said:


> let's say you make two products. a 40V 20Ah (12s9p) and a 40V 40Ah (12s18p) block it should be able to cover a good many solutions


I think that this isn't a good idea. They would have to make a universal BMS for everyone but we'll use them in different applications with different requirements

In my opinion the best way to go is "copying" the TS model. We can connect the cells into series to the voltages we want with the chosen Ah rating


----------



## Dan Frederiksen (Jul 26, 2007)

but it's not. if you want 120V that's 36 high current cables you would need and for each block you'd need to make high current terminals and equally shared connection in the pack to those terminals. it's a huge design overhead, even if you make larger blocks like 100Ah. and if your system voltage is 330V you'd need 100 high current cables and blocks designed for that connector. that just doesn't seem smart to me.


----------



## Drew (Jul 26, 2009)

CroDriver said:


> I think that this isn't a good idea. They would have to make a universal BMS for everyone but we'll use them in different applications with different requirements
> 
> In my opinion the best way to go is "copying" the TS model. We can connect the cells into series to the voltages we want with the chosen Ah rating


from the little I know about batteries I thought that the cells really had to be individually managed to maintain balance, especially in high current draw applications. I'd prefer serial strings as well, so that I can do that. It also allows redundancy in battery layout because if one string decides to trip out then there will be other strings to pick up the slack.

Personally my preference would be for something like 12 cell strings with individual battery management IC, reason being that there will soon be a chip released by MAXIM which will manage 12 cells in a string.

this would mean that you could just have 40V 2.3Ah strings and put them together in a fashion which suited you...

I'm partially thinking of myself here who wants to build an AC electric motorbike so I need high voltages and low Ah but theres no reason that somebody couldn't just get 50 small strings and parallel them.


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

We are tentatively planning on offering the A123 cells in three different ways. I am going to put this out there as an example. This is not yet set in stone, I am only posting this now to get your input. 

We cannot build custom for everyone because that would be too time intensive. We need to make a few designs, then stick with them. I am sure everyone can understand that requirement.

Proposed ideas:
==================================

With the 2.3ah batteries we would be offering the smallest pack array of 4 batteries in series 10 wide. That would give us basically a 12v 20ah battery. But it could do 600 amps continuous and 1000 pulses. which would be perfect for a Zilla Z1K. 

Then we could build a 12v 40ah pack for the Z2K which would be arrays of 4 in series 20 wide (probably would stack them to make the shape nicer). so with some simple math that would be a 1200 amp continuous and 2000 amp pulse.

Then for the true racers we make a 12v 80ah pack (4 series 40 wide) which would do 2400 continuous and 4000 amp pulses or a 12v 60ah (4series 30 wide) that would be 1800 continuous and 3000 peak. 

Array of 4 in series 10 paralleled
12.8v @ 23ah - 690 amp Cont 1,150 amp Peak

Array of 4 in series 20 paralleled
12.8v @ 46ah - 1,380 amp Cont 2,300 amp Peak

Array of 4 in series 30 paralleled
12.8v @ 69ah - 2,070 amp Cont 3,450 amp Peak

Comments welcome...


----------



## Sutitan (Feb 23, 2009)

EVComponents said:


> Array of 4 in series 10 paralleled
> 12.8v @ 23ah - 690 amp Cont 1,150 amp Peak


Love the idea, but i just noticed you never really mentioned the nominal voltage until now. Everyone was throwing around the 3.3v figure and the a123 website also claimed 3.3, so wouldent it be 13.2v. 

just need a little clarification on that. as long as you guys can get 5$ a cell or close, ill most likely be going with these vs the TS


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

Sutitan said:


> Love the idea, but i just noticed you never really mentioned the nominal voltage until now. Everyone was throwing around the 3.3v figure and the a123 website also claimed 3.3, so wouldent it be 13.2v.
> 
> just need a little clarification on that. as long as you guys can get 5$ a cell or close, ill most likely be going with these vs the TS


You are correct on voltage. It is 3.3 V.

We would be offering the cells at $5 each (or close to that) with no work done by us.

If you would like a prebuilt module as described above that would be a higher price to account for that labor and work done. We would be designing these and testing them. The goal would be to have some easy configurations that would easily work for most people.

The price per cell for these prebuilt modules is unknown. We have not built them yet and don't have a cost estimate. 

I am trying to figure out demand. Do our customers want the raw cells at the lowest price? 
Or pay more for a standard module? How much more is it worth paying for that welding, assembly and testing?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

EVComponents said:


> I am trying to figure out demand. Do our customers want the raw cells at the lowest price?
> Or pay more for a standard module? How much more is it worth paying for that welding, assembly and testing?


I'm sure there is a market for both but I'd guess more people will want the prebuilt modules since most don't have the welding equipment.
Here's a question, does this picture represent any actual product that A123 makes? The studs would make assembly much easier.


----------



## Sutitan (Feb 23, 2009)

The beauty of buying the raw cells is being able to configure them in away to fit into our design. Certain people with e-bikes or e-motorcycle might need to design there own size to fit into the area they are working with. but then again, its not like Pb and Prismatic Li batteries have stopped people from cutting into there cars, fairings, etc.

as far as price per cell assembled, i mentioned 396 cells for 2200 dollars in one of my previous posts, which works out to 5.55 per cell. i hope that not offensive, cause ive only seen pictures of people assembling these things. I heard that these little cells can take up quite a bit of time. So dont take it as thats what id want but more like, thats would I would really like.

also, are you planning on offering pre tabbed cells for a bit more per cell?

Someone also mentioned the MAX11080 (http://www.maxim-ic.com/quick_view2.cfm/qv_pk/5524) which i guess is some sort of bms. No balancing, but offers some cell level HV/LV protection (max 72v and 372cells so a no go for me). Which kind of brings me to my point. What do you guys plan on doing as far as BMS's go. i was planning on putting volt blochers on each parallel string, but that would only offer management at the string level, not cell. do you guys think that these cells require a cell managing bms?


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> I'm sure there is a market for both but I'd guess more people will want the prebuilt modules since most don't have the welding equipment.
> Here's a question, does this picture represent any actual product that A123 makes? The studs would make assembly much easier.


That pictures looks like the :
A123 Model# 38120S ... I thought they stopped making that design... but last I heard they were 10Ah cells retailing for $18 each when bought in lots of 1,000+ cells.


----------



## Jeff (Sep 25, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Here's a question, does this picture represent any actual product that A123 makes? The studs would make assembly much easier. (Image of 30120 or similar stud cell from A123 Systems)



I think you might already know the answer to this one.

Only the commodity M1 cells are available to integrators. There are no production quantities of the Prismatic cells, or the stud cells made available. Especially not to small timers like us.

They do stock small quantities of cells to provide to future customers who may provide them a large market segment.

Also, promotional stuff like Dube's bike may be supported by the above means.

Anything small market EV without capitalization, or a wannabe with an epiphany need not apply.

As far a EV Components deal:

I'd like to see this happen. I once facilitated a 10k pc M1 cell purchase from A123 Systems back in 2007, and it wasn't easy. I had street cred and a sheepskin to back it with, otherwise It would not have happened.


And, their IPO last week has floated them to the high tide line. 

A123 Systems had no interest in selling these small quantities, and the price was over $1 per watt. If their apathy to small EV'rs remains, it'll be tough to pull off. That is, unless you buy into the same M1A cells that the chinese are marketing on ebay today. Of course you'd have to stop calling those "B" cells that they're selling 

If a deal can be struck with A123 System to allow retailing at a max of $5 per cell with some level of warranty to cover high discharge cells, then you might make some money.


Don't do any chest beating yet. Good Luck.

Regards, Jeff


----------



## BradBowler (Mar 28, 2008)

I like the idea of an array of 4, and then offering higher amps thru additional parallel cells. Hopefully, this will make for a more modular BMS integration as well. Keep going, you're on the right track.


----------



## neanderthal (Jul 24, 2008)

I'm actually with crodriver on this one. If we have 3.3v nominal cells we can use whichever bms we like. Just like the TS, SE, headway, and china hi power cells.


----------



## Drew (Jul 26, 2009)

Sutitan said:


> The beauty of buying the raw cells is being able to configure them in away to fit into our design. Certain people with e-bikes or e-motorcycle might need to design there own size to fit into the area they are working with. but then again, its not like Pb and Prismatic Li batteries have stopped people from cutting into there cars, fairings, etc.
> 
> as far as price per cell assembled, i mentioned 396 cells for 2200 dollars in one of my previous posts, which works out to 5.55 per cell. i hope that not offensive, cause ive only seen pictures of people assembling these things. I heard that these little cells can take up quite a bit of time. So dont take it as thats what id want but more like, thats would I would really like.
> 
> ...


The BMS chip I was referring to was the MAX11068 which will apparently have balancing built in. That being said the datasheet is not released yet so there are no public details.


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

Jeff said:


> That is, unless you buy into the same M1A cells that the chinese are marketing on ebay today. Of course you'd have to stop calling those "B" cells that they're selling


Don't worry about that. We are only offering the "A" cells. We are making sure of that before we even start with this product.
We have a few of the A123 developer kits to work with while we get this started.


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

Sutitan said:


> I also think it would help if you guys (EVcomponents) welded the tabs onto the cells (unless they came like that from a123, which would be awesome). i know most of us DIYers dont have tab welders, and then we will go out and build DIY tab welders, and then make DIY explosions.


We are definitely getting a tab welder to make this happen if we proceed with the A123 cells.

Would that be of interest to customers? Just tab welded cells and provide them like that? That is a relatively simple process. It is just an expensive piece of equipment to purchase. Most tab welders are over $5,000+. 

We would charge more than raw cells, but not much more.


----------



## Sutitan (Feb 23, 2009)

EVComponents said:


> Would that be of interest to customers? Just tab welded cells and provide them like that? That is a relatively simple process. It is just an expensive piece of equipment to purchase. Most tab welders are over $5,000+.


They only reason i mentioned them was cause I know that this is a diy community, and some people might be willing to do it them selves vs paying more for an assembled pack. Im not 100% sure about what im about to say, so correct me if I am wrong. The a123 cells have an aluminum cell body which isnt the easiest to solder to due to its low melting temperature, thus requiring some sort of flux (usually zinc). extended durations of direct heat from soldering on the cell body can ruin the cell by damaging either the insulator or electrolyte. So by adding a tab, it would give DIYers an easier (and a bit safer) surface to solder to/on.


----------



## !George (Jun 9, 2009)

I think raw cells with tabs offers the most dynamic setup for DIY'ers. I know that for myself it would give me more options in regards to mounting the cells in a given area versus hacking up the car to make them fit.


----------



## jorhyne (Aug 20, 2008)

I would prefer prewelded cells, but I think there would be a market for both raw cells and pre made configs.


----------



## tomev (Mar 29, 2009)

Ok Newbie Question.
in the example of the killacycle using the m1 cell, how come they use so many cells ,its something like 1210,
I think its a 374 volt pack = 374 /3.3 = 113 ish cells,
113-1210=1097
1097* 2.3 ah=2513 ah
isnt that perhaps overkill for a 1/4 mile run
Again newbie please excuse my ineptitude.
Tom


----------



## Dan Frederiksen (Jul 26, 2007)

ignorance is perfectly fine as long as it's not willful ignorance.

the reason is that power (which is what's required to build up the kinetic energy of the bike) is a product of voltage and current. V*I. so you need both. and each cell can 'only' deliver maybe 100A which is a lot for a single such cell but not nearly enough for the power hungry killa. so you have several cells side by side in what's called parallel connection. so they can work together to provide a combined current. so not only do they have about 100 cells in series but they have 10+ cells in parallel for each in series. so the pack can do 300+ Volt at the same time as delivering 1000+ Ampere. the combination of which is 300kW (300V*1000A) or 400 ponies.

btw, you can understand current and voltage and electronics in general in terms of a water pipe circuit. current is the flow rate of water in the pipe circuit, you can imagine liter/second but for current it's electrical charge/second that flow past a given point in the circuit. the voltage is like the water pressure between two points in a circuit. let's say you have a valve on the pipe where on the one side there is 3bar of water pressure and on the other there is vacuum so you have a 3bar pressure difference. that's like voltage in a circuit. you can have 3volt in a battery and once you switch it on by for instance short circuiting it then the 'water' (current) will start flowing as a result of that 3volt of pressure. volt is what's needed to motivate current. a battery alone has voltage but no current but the voltage is ready to go where the circuit allows it to flow.
what's a little harder to understand is that the combination of voltage and current is the power. you can understand that in terms of resistance in a pipe. if you have a thick pipe then 3liter/second will flow very easily in it. very little pressure required. no sweat. but 3liter/second through a straw will require a high pressure (voltage). so if the flow is very easy you can have a lot of current yet very little voltage required to make it run so the combination is that it takes very little power to do that current. that's why a superconductor ring can have huge current running in it forever with no use of power whatsoever yet a heating element with high resistance (think very thin pipe) will require a lot of voltage (pressure) to keep a current going. that's why the heating element gets hot. it drains electrical energy.

so voltage is like pressure difference in a pipe circuit. current is the flowrate. resistance is like pipe diameter and a capacitor you can think of as a bulb on the pipe but with a rubber membrane across it. that way the water can't really flow through it but the membrane can be stressed out like a spring and push the water back later. it's like a little battery. you tension it and it can give that tension back later. the tension is measured in voltage. the size of the membrane is the capacitance.


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

tomev said:


> Ok Newbie Question.
> in the example of the killacycle using the m1 cell, how come they use so many cells ,its something like 1210,
> I think its a 374 volt pack = 374 /3.3 = 113 ish cells,
> 113-1210=1097
> ...


Minor correction in your calculations...
374 volt pack = 374 / 3.3 = 113 ish cells for each string
That's how many cells in series each string needs to get the voltage.

Then you can tie the strings together in parallel to add up the Ah. Each string must have the same voltage though when you tie it. So it's not - but /.
1210 total / 113 per parallel string = about 10 strings total

Total Amp Hours is then 10 strings * 2.3 Ah = 23 Ah
Sounds about right for a 1/4 mile run. Make sense?


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

ClintK said:


> Minor correction in your calculations...
> 374 volt pack = 374 / 3.3 = 113 ish cells for each string
> That's how many cells in series each string needs to get the voltage.
> 
> ...


+1

23AH * 50C = 1150A 

The cells will probably sag to 2.0V @ 50C draw so pack voltage of 226V.
226V * 1150A = 260kw ~ 350HP


----------



## notnull (Jul 30, 2008)

If you check out the Plasma boy racing site, they have info on a test they did with the A123 cells. I believe it was a 110s8p configuration and they had to turn the controller down to 1000A (or less) because the voltage dropped so far. I have never seen any published results of those cells holding 2.0V at 50C.

I do know for a fact that they hold 2.5V at a 20C load and very close to 3.0V at a 10C load. I have used them in electric bicycles and r/c airplanes at these rates and recorded the results. 

If I wanted to have a max draw of 1000A, I would build a 50Ah pack and I could be guaranteed (based on my testing and other published reports) that the pack would hold 2.5V per cell. That makes it pretty easy to determine how many cells you need in series. I think the most you want to push through a Warp 9 is 170V divided by 2.5 per cell is 68 is series and 22 in parallel. That is about 1500 cells. You would then be able to actually get 170KW of power out and the pack would weigh about 250 lbs. Pretty darn good, if you ask me. If I had the 10K it would require, this is the pack I would build.

Of course, you would need a controller that can limit voltage because your nominal would be much higher than 170V but it would drop to this value under load.

Anyway, all of that to get to this. My vote would be for 50ah modules. 

Steve


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

notnull said:


> If you check out the Plasma boy racing site, they have info on a test they did with the A123 cells. I believe it was a 110s8p configuration and they had to turn the controller down to 1000A (or less) because the voltage dropped so far. I have never seen any published results of those cells holding 2.0V at 50C.
> 
> I do know for a fact that they hold 2.5V at a 20C load and very close to 3.0V at a 10C load. I have used them in electric bicycles and r/c airplanes at these rates and recorded the results.
> 
> ...


2.0V @ 50C was a hopeful guesstimate...

http://a123systems.com/cms/product/pdf/1/ANR26650M1A_Datasheet_APRIL_2009.pdf

Looks like 40A (17C) is [email protected] 50C would a 3.3V cell really dip all the way to 1.65V? (50%!)


----------



## Dan Frederiksen (Jul 26, 2007)

you can see the spec sheet says 70A continuous and 120A 10second pulse.
so it seems 100A is not entirely unrealistic for a drag.

but the specifics were not too important. it was just to explain parallel coupling of batteries to get higher current capability


----------



## tomev (Mar 29, 2009)

ahh it makes sense to me now,thanks for the guidance guys i apreciate it


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

You might find this chart on page 5 very useful if you are planning to use these. They indepentantly tested these cells and discuss the max continous C rating versus temperature, voltage drop, and cycle life. The Multi C chart of theirs was very enlightening to me and although I'm not looking to get cylindrical cells(in order to create a simpler system with less cells), if I were looking for cylindricals I'd really love to jump for the A123 cells. For short bursts of power, I don't doubt their capabilities of 120amps for 10 seconds(perfect for burst acceleration) but for the longest cycle life I wouldn't look at pulling more than 5 C continously based on their data, in order to get 1000+ cycles. ...but then again 5 C continous would be an EV that drives for 12 minutes and is done, which isn't practical to an EV. Of course this independent test predicts the main factor to degradation of cells is the 140 degree F(60 degree C) temperature.

Either way, that is one super impressive flat discharge curve and very low voltage sag in my opinion.

http://www.fmadirect.com/support_docs/item_1229.pdf


----------



## Drew (Jul 26, 2009)

Are there any updates on the likely timeframes for availability of these cells?


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

Drew said:


> Are there any updates on the likely timeframes for availability of these cells?


The Asian factory is holding out for a lot of money for these cells, even when purchased on bulk. We are trying to work something out where we can bring them and make it worthwhile. We should know for sure, yes or no, within two or three weeks.

That is when our next large container leaves China. We want these A123 cells on board that container to keep shipping costs lower.


----------



## jorhyne (Aug 20, 2008)

EVComponents said:


> The Asian factory is holding out for a lot of money for these cells, even when purchased on bulk. We are trying to work something out where we can bring them and make it worthwhile. We should know for sure, yes or no, within two or three weeks.
> 
> That is when our next large container leaves China. We want these A123 cells on board that container to keep shipping costs lower.


Wait why are you dealing with a factory in China? I know the cells are made there but aren't their offices based in California?


----------



## gdirwin (Apr 7, 2009)

Any more news on this? Pricing, pack sizes etc...?


----------



## dexion (Aug 22, 2009)

gdirwin said:


> Any more news on this? Pricing, pack sizes etc...?


I am interested too, i sent an email via the web site chat yesterday but I dont know if they got it.


----------



## TheSGC (Nov 15, 2007)

jorhyne said:


> Wait why are you dealing with a factory in China? I know the cells are made there but aren't their offices based in California?


Actually, A123 Systems is located in Massachusetts, about 30 minutes from me. 

I thought they were made in the US, not in China. HHHmmmmm..........

Edit: Ok, I do see they have factories in Asia, according to their website.


----------



## Jokerzwild (Jun 11, 2009)

Question can you use and A123 cell with a high discharge rate in conjunction with low discharge rate units?


----------



## WarpedOne (Jun 26, 2009)

> Question can you use and A123 cell with a high discharge rate in conjunction with low discharge rate units?


Such cells won't have same/similar internal resistance leading to very uneven dis/charging and their quick death.


----------



## BMI/LiFeTech (Aug 12, 2009)

EVComponents said:


> The Asian factory is holding out for a lot of money for these cells, even when purchased on bulk. We are trying to work something out where we can bring them and make it worthwhile. We should know for sure, yes or no, within two or three weeks.
> 
> That is when our next large container leaves China. We want these A123 cells on board that container to keep shipping costs lower.


Hang on. Something doesn't make sense here.

If these cells are coming from China/Asia they must be either copies/fakes or very old stock of genuine A123 cells.
As I understand it as a result of the legal case brought by Phostec Canada for patent infringement by A123 Systems,(which A123 lost) as part of the terms of settlement all contracts with A123 Systems to have their cells manufactured in China were cancelled. This is why they were forced to move back to the USA to manufacture their cells and as a result the price of cells went up. So if any A123 cells aren't manufactured or originate from the US they are not genuine.

I would look forward to someone explaining to me where I am wrong or otherwise incorrect?


----------



## BMI/LiFeTech (Aug 12, 2009)

Some background for those already not familiar with the story-


----------



## esoneson (Sep 1, 2008)

BMI/LiFeTech said:


> Some background for those already not familiar with the story-


That doc is dated 2006.
So, what has happened in the court system over the past 3 years? Patents are patents, the courts say what's what. Just curious. 

Eric


----------



## jorhyne (Aug 20, 2008)

EVComponents lack of comment on this thread as of late certainly isn't helping their credibility.


----------



## BMI/LiFeTech (Aug 12, 2009)

esoneson said:


> That doc is dated 2006.
> So, what has happened in the court system over the past 3 years? Patents are patents, the courts say what's what. Just curious.
> 
> Eric


Some 12 months or more ago (how time flies) Phostech won the case and it cost A123 Systems 20million USD in legal costs alone. 
The contracts to manufacture cells cheaply by the Chinese cell manufacturers such as China BAK were cancelled. A123 was forced to move back to the US to manufacture their product which is why they have been setting up manufacturing facilities in the USA. This resulted in a dramatic price rise in A123 cells.

A few years back it was quite economical for the rc model aeroplane/helicopter guys and e-bike guys to buy the Dewalt battery packs for the cells but once the relatively cheap Chinese manufactured source for the cells dried up as a result of the court case the cost of Dewalt packs has risen considerably.

That is why I am suspicious when I hear of any battery/EV parts supplier who claims to be sourcing A123 cells from China. 

Of course there may be more to the story than this since I haven't been keeping too close an eye on what is happening of late. The last I heard was that Phostech is now taking on Valence Technology in the courts. I am sure others will follow.

But to be fair we should give EVComponents a chance to reply as well as answer their claim in another thread where they say that it is OK to use Thundersky cells installed on the sides. They still have not stated that warranty will be honoured if cells are fitted on the sides and they start to leak.

In the lithium battery business where customers are spending more on a battery pack than for any other component in their EV conversions, no battery manufacturer/supplier (myself included) can afford to lie or mislead their customers in any way.

Always tell the truth. Simple as that.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I doubt EVcomponents would knowingly deceive anyone. In my dealings with them as EV dealers and enthusiasts they have been straightforward and very helpful, and quite frankly their efforts have helped change the pricing on large scale prismatics. Other dealers were forced to lower their prices by quite a bit just to compete. I'm sure they'll stop by this thread again to update the situation.


----------



## neanderthal (Jul 24, 2008)

I agree. EVcomponents has always been great and very straightforward and have done a lot to gain our trust. Lets not do anything to ruin all their hard work with assumptions. Its easy to stain a reputation, and hard to gain a good rep.


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

At this point in time we are no longer actively negotiating with the asian factory that is producing the A123 cells. They are holding out for too much money per cell to make it worthwhile. These cells are being produced in asia and are the A123 cells. I am not up-to-date on the legal battles of different patent owners on these issues.

I ordered the A123 developer's kit (from A123) to verify the quality of the cells from asia if we proceeded. However it looks like nothing is going to happen via EV Components in the near future.

I am not familiar with the legal battles on A123 cells or the reasons why the asian source is currently producing and marketing these cells. 
I do know that we were dealing with the manufacturer that is/was the producer for A123 cells. Chinese companies are willing to bend many rules on patents.

We were told that A123 is no longer purchasing the minimum contract amounts, so the factory is making them available to other buyers. On that basis, and if the quality were to check out, we were interested in purchasing the cells in bulk and selling them via EV Components.

But for now nothing is happening. If it doesn't make business sense, then there is no point in proceeding.

The only cylindrical cells we currently are offering are the Headway cells.

http://www.evcomponents.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=41

Sorry to get your hopes up on affordable A123 cells.


----------



## Jeff (Sep 25, 2008)

BMI/LiFeTech said:


> Some 12 months or more ago (how time flies) Phostech won the case and it cost A123 Systems 20million USD in legal costs alone.
> The contracts to manufacture cells cheaply by the Chinese cell manufacturers such as China BAK were cancelled. A123 was forced to move back to the US to manufacture their product which is why they have been setting up manufacturing facilities in the USA. This resulted in a dramatic price rise in A123 cells.
> 
> A few years back it was quite economical for the rc model aeroplane/helicopter guys and e-bike guys to buy the Dewalt battery packs for the cells but once the relatively cheap Chinese manufactured source for the cells dried up as a result of the court case the cost of Dewalt packs has risen considerably.
> ...



Dang it Armin, you just *had* to go and piss on their campfire huh!

Your post contains a few misleading statements, and it won't stand on it's own merit. Armin; you are a Salesman, and have your own agenda. 

The boys at EV Components are trying to punch a hole through the walls erected by the likes of you and others. They should be applauded and supported in their efforts.

Folks reading this thread:
What Armin stated is not the whole truth.
The M1A cells being exported are the real deal, they simply are not tested to the same critical specifications as the cells shipping to Black and Decker (DeWalt). I'm bound by an NDA, and I can't elaborate further on it.

The cells being sold on ebay are real, and not "B" cells as Jim has commented on earlier.

As far as quality:
The critically tested "A" cells will yield a 3% failure average in 24 mos.
I suspect the cells available for sale now will not exceed that by very much.

I have no agenda here aside from clearing out the preemptive stink being laid down by a battery salesman.

Regards, Jeff


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I did a bunch of Googling and could not find anything about Phostech winning the lawsuit.


----------



## Jeff (Sep 25, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> I did a bunch of Googling and could not find anything about Phostech winning the lawsuit.


Agreed. I forgot to post this link from a Sept 24 Bloomberg report. It answers some points hinted to earlier.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a0Kg.kW9OuMw


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

BMI/LiFeTech said:


> Some 12 months or more ago (how time flies) Phostech won the case and it cost A123 Systems 20million USD in legal costs alone.


From the article http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a0Kg.kW9OuMw :


> Sept. 24 (Bloomberg) -- A123 Systems Inc., a maker of lithium batteries for plug-in cars that first sold stock today, is in talks to end a patent dispute with the University of Texas and Hydro-Quebec over technology underlying its products.





BMI/LiFeTech said:


> Always tell the truth. Simple as that.


Indeed.


----------



## paker (Jun 20, 2008)

I thought A123 Systems, or the people at MIT, developed their lithium battery


----------



## BMI/LiFeTech (Aug 12, 2009)

paker said:


> I thought A123 Systems, or the people at MIT, developed their lithium battery


Hardly! They stole the idea from Dr John Goodenough/University of Texas.
Dr Goodenough is the recognised inventor of the LiFePO4 battery and owner of the patent rights to it. 
If A123 had not stolen Dr Goodenough's discovery and tried to make out is was their own there would be no lawsuit for patent infringement.


----------



## Mesuge (Mar 6, 2008)

I guess to each his own, but the petty patent issues often times result in roadblocks to progress. Imagine, the inventor of WWW, Tim Berners-Lee, runing all over the world with his gang of lawyers instead, likely there wouldn't be this forum or perhaps even the EV renaissance pushed in part by the diy community organized thanks to web..


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

BMI/LiFeTech said:


> Hardly! They stole the idea from Dr John Goodenough/University of Texas.


In actuality the jury is still out on this statement since no judgment has been made.


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

"but the petty patent issues often times result in roadblocks to progress."

I agree with that statement from above. The first (almost)mass produced EV's, with the Ovonic EV-95 batteries such as the second generation EV1 and the Toyota RAV4 electric cars were excellent cars and proved the use of NiMH technology. ...but the patent is owned by an oil company who won't license out the technology to anyone.

Patents, in my opinion, are great if they are used in a manner to collect a reasonable royalty and allow the patented technology to be produced and allowing the patent owner to be compensated for their discovery because that sort of patent usage encourages people to innovate and produce new things, but to use a patent as a barrier preventing an idea to be used or to completely prevent someone from using a technology such as Large format NiMH's or if the LiFePO4 production was completely shut out, it would be a serious problem for the EV community. I sure know that I wouldn't want to be using a PbA pack after seeing the advantages of the currently unavailable NiMH packs and the current Lithium technologies that I hope will stick around.


----------



## Jeff (Sep 25, 2008)

MN Driver said:


> "but the petty patent issues often times result in roadblocks to progress."
> 
> I agree with that statement from above. The first (almost)mass produced EV's, with the Ovonic EV-95 batteries such as the second generation EV1 and the Toyota RAV4 electric cars were excellent cars and proved the use of NiMH technology. ...but the patent is owned by an oil company who won't license out the technology to anyone.
> 
> Patents, in my opinion, are great if they are used in a manner to collect a reasonable royalty and allow the patented technology to be produced and allowing the patent owner to be compensated for their discovery because that sort of patent usage encourages people to innovate and produce new things, but to use a patent as a barrier preventing an idea to be used or to completely prevent someone from using a technology such as Large format NiMH's or if the LiFePO4 production was completely shut out, it would be a serious problem for the EV community. I sure know that I wouldn't want to be using a PbA pack after seeing the advantages of the currently unavailable NiMH packs and the current Lithium technologies that I hope will stick around.


Funny coincidence your posting this stuff on the EV1/Ovonic NiMH, etc..

I worked hard to recover and salvage these NiMH modules as GM was crushing the EV1's. If you're interested; you can google EV Bones for some background.

"Squatting" is a nasty aspect of the patent system. Agreed. Cobasys (Chevron Ovonic Battery Systems) and their oily ilk were a huge and visible example as the worst of this behavior. NiMH, beyond the "D" size cell was locked up by ECD and Cobasys. And only Gold Peak had a grandfathered license allowing manufacture of traction size NiMH modules. (Note: I said "were", as nearly the entire portfolio with most of the patents were sold off by Chevron last month).

That was all made possible by Ovshinsky's patent portfolio stranglehold on all aspects of NiMH secondary cell properties.

Fortunately, much of the improvements made to lithium secondary cell manufacture have occurred through collective efforts in the university labs, and therefore difficult to validate ownership of some fundamental "key" processes. Doping is one of those, and Goodenough's work is being challenged here.

Yes, there could be some impedance to Lithium Fe (iron) licensing here in the beginning, although once precedence is set it will be easier with fewer challenges.

Anyway, let's hope somebody can facilitate a few container loads of A123 M1A cells into our western ports at a competitive price. I'd be one of the first to belly up to the bar with their checkbook in hand.


----------



## MJ Monterey (Aug 20, 2009)

So a Samsung/Bosch partnership (SB LiMotive) purchased the patents. 

I can hear the sales persons line now, "If you want 50k packs per year, as assembled units, that were designed by SB LiMotive engineers (at your expense, 'Don't worry about it we can work out the fees') then we may decide to talk with you". 

I am not a pessimist, I am pretty damn positive that we will not see any cost effective production, usable for conversions, coming out of these folks either!


----------



## jackbauer (Jan 12, 2008)

10ah D size and 14AH F size nimh cells are widely available from china but one seems to need a certain bit of "magic dust" to actually get one of these companies to sell. Perhaps evcomponents could look at this option?


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> In actuality the jury is still out on this statement since no judgment has been made.


...and never will be. They will settle for some amount of money to make him go away.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Jeff said:


> Funny coincidence your posting this stuff on the EV1/Ovonic NiMH, etc..
> 
> I worked hard to recover and salvage these NiMH modules as GM was crushing the EV1's. If you're interested; you can google EV Bones for some background.
> 
> ...


It always astounds me how, under our system of patents, people can financially control what is in essence nothing more than chemistry.

Somehow I always thought that if anyone could own such a thing it would be limited to god (if you believe, and no one if you don't), and s/he isn't holding the markets hostage to such patents...


----------



## Jeff (Sep 25, 2008)

MJ Monterey said:


> So a Samsung/Bosch partnership (SB LiMotive) purchased the patents.
> 
> I can hear the sales persons line now, "If you want 50k packs per year, as assembled units, that were designed by SB LiMotive engineers (at your expense, 'Don't worry about it we can work out the fees') then we may decide to talk with you".
> 
> I am not a pessimist, I am pretty damn positive that we will not see any cost effective production, usable for conversions, coming out of these folks either!


Yeah, that's a good one 

Not too worry though; NiMH has been effectively eclipsed in nearly everything except HEV's and stationary apps by variations on Lithium chemistry. Do you folks know how much Matsushita pays in juice to ECD for every Prius pack? Let me know if you do. My best guess is somewhere between $70 and $120, and that's with analysis I did in '05. It's not been published.

We can only hope that there have been enough basic improvements (modifications) to the chemistry that no one individual can claim ownership, and repeat the disaster that occurred with the NiMH squatting.

Chevron understood recently that NiMH was becoming obsolete, and also weighed on their reputation (with thanks to WKtEC). So it was time to unload it. I've no idea where SB LiMotive is headed with it. Surely not to sell obsolete hybrid battery products to MBUSA 

So, the moral of the story is: Big business has no morals.


----------



## Jeff (Sep 25, 2008)

(slap on the head)
I was too slow to realize that I totally hijacked EV Components thread on A123 M1 cells. I'm really sorry about that. I'll keep any further posts on subject.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I wouldn't worry about it, it looks as if the deal is DOA, and taking threads off topic is standard operating procedure around here


----------



## EVComponents (Apr 20, 2009)

Jeff said:


> (slap on the head)
> I was too slow to realize that I totally hijacked EV Components thread on A123 M1 cells. I'm really sorry about that. I'll keep any further posts on subject.


I don't mind. The A123 deal is not happening anytime soon because of a common problem. They want too much money for those silly A123 cells.

Feel free to hijack the thread. I remember those frustrations with ECD stock and Cobasys.


----------



## speedily (Mar 13, 2009)

EVComponents said:


> I don't mind. The A123 deal is not happening anytime soon because of a common problem. They want too much money for those silly A123 cells.
> 
> Feel free to hijack the thread. I remember those frustrations with ECD stock and Cobasys.


 don't want to sale to masses just yet more money selling to DE WALT


----------

