# [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

I did a rough measurement of the amount of energy in a TS-LFP100AHA
cell I received in the EV Components order which arrived at the end of
December 2009.

I do not have a recording system so this was done by hand. First I
used a BK Precision 1761 bench top power supply and an Extech EX830
meter. First I used the EX830 to set the voltage limit on the power
supply. Then I hooked up the cell and let it charge to the desired
voltage until the current dropped below 4ma. Next I disconnected the
cell and set the voltage limit of the power supply to 4.00v as
measured with the EX830. I powered off the power supply, then I hooked
up the EX830 to the cell terminals and leads from the cell to the
power supply and set the power supply display to read current in amps.
I then turned on the power supply and read and recorded the current
and voltage. At 1 minute intervals I recorded the voltage at the cell
terminals and the current displayed by the power supply. I recorded
data every minute until the current was well below 100mA. Then I
recorded at longer intervals. I stopped recording when the current was
below 40mA.

I entered the data (time, volts, amps) into a spreadsheet and
calculated the Wh and Ah for each time interval using the average
voltage and average current for the interval in question. My results
are:

Start voltage: 3.600
End voltage: 4.00 (my meter switches to 2 decimal places at 3.98V)
Watt-hours: 0.87
Amp-hours: 0.22

Start voltage: 3.500
End voltage: 4.00
Watt-hours: 1.18
Amp-hours: 0.36

Start voltage: 3.397
End voltage: 4.00
Watt-hours: 2.42
Amp-hours: 0.66

What I would like to know is at what current would a cell terminal
voltage read 4.00V but the OC voltage would settle to be 3.4V. This
might be useful in designing charging algorithms for fast charging up
to the desired cutoff voltage. Since there seems to be very little
energy above 3.4V why bother going above it other than to shorten
charging time?

Comments? Are my calculations within reason?

-- 
David D. Nelson
http://evalbum.com/1328

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

David;

Based on the data you've collected, maybe you can help me understand
something I've been struggling with.

My 156 nominal pack, 12V x 13 batteries usually sets fully charged at ~
167V - 12.85V per battery.
My Raptor controller is limited to 180VDC max.

If these Lithium's ever get to a point where I can afford them, how do
you calculate how many you would need to replace a 156V nominal pack? 
Do you use the nominal voltage of 3.2 per cell, finish voltage of 4.0,
or something in between.
When you're looking at 49 to 50 cells, this makes a huge difference.
49 cells at 3.2 = 157V, and 49 cells at 4.0 = 196V.

Any explanation would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks;
Dennis 
Elsberry, MO 
http://www.evalbum.com/1366 





-----Original Message-----
From: David Nelson [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 10:45 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v

I did a rough measurement of the amount of energy in a TS-LFP100AHA cell
I received in the EV Components order which arrived at the end of
December 2009.

I do not have a recording system so this was done by hand. First I used
a BK Precision 1761 bench top power supply and an Extech EX830 meter.
First I used the EX830 to set the voltage limit on the power supply.
Then I hooked up the cell and let it charge to the desired voltage until
the current dropped below 4ma. Next I disconnected the cell and set the
voltage limit of the power supply to 4.00v as measured with the EX830. I
powered off the power supply, then I hooked up the EX830 to the cell
terminals and leads from the cell to the power supply and set the power
supply display to read current in amps.
I then turned on the power supply and read and recorded the current and
voltage. At 1 minute intervals I recorded the voltage at the cell
terminals and the current displayed by the power supply. I recorded data
every minute until the current was well below 100mA. Then I recorded at
longer intervals. I stopped recording when the current was below 40mA.

I entered the data (time, volts, amps) into a spreadsheet and calculated
the Wh and Ah for each time interval using the average voltage and
average current for the interval in question. My results
are:

Start voltage: 3.600
End voltage: 4.00 (my meter switches to 2 decimal places at 3.98V)
Watt-hours: 0.87
Amp-hours: 0.22

Start voltage: 3.500
End voltage: 4.00
Watt-hours: 1.18
Amp-hours: 0.36

Start voltage: 3.397
End voltage: 4.00
Watt-hours: 2.42
Amp-hours: 0.66

What I would like to know is at what current would a cell terminal
voltage read 4.00V but the OC voltage would settle to be 3.4V. This
might be useful in designing charging algorithms for fast charging up to
the desired cutoff voltage. Since there seems to be very little energy
above 3.4V why bother going above it other than to shorten charging
time?

Comments? Are my calculations within reason?

--
David D. Nelson
http://evalbum.com/1328



_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

I know what you mean about trying to pick the correct # of cells. I
have 18 buddy pairs (200Ah per pair) in my pack. I have a Zivan NG1
programmed for 48V of T-875s. I've been playing with the voltage
adjustment pot to get it to charge my new pack without going over 70V
and yet still have a reasonably quick charge by not entering the
constant voltage stage too early. As I have watched the pack voltage I
find it sits between 60-62V after the top charge has been bled off.
This is with the batteries at around 50F. As I watch the pack voltage
during charge it sits at 60.4-60.7V for quite a while, charging at
about 18A. When it gets to about 61.5V or so the voltage begins to
climb rather rapidly even though the charger has backed off to the 6A
acceptance stage (remember the algorithm is for Lead Acid batteries).
The voltage climbs rather quickly up to 70.5V. The charger at this
point is trying to keep the voltage from going over this point so it
has cut back to somewhere under 0.5A. Yesterday I turned down the
voltage adjustment pot a 1/4 turn during this phase of charging and
the pack voltage dropped to 70.3V the charger went to drawing only 16W
from the wall for a minute or so and the was back up to 35W from the
wall which turns out to be about 0.5A into the batteries. I have a
slight parasitic load on my battery pack and I don't know how much
this is so some of the charge goes to support that. After charging to
70+V the pack voltage drops to about 68V after 15 minutes or so.
Remember I have a slight parasitic load. I don't have a numeric scale
on my volt meter but the pack is in the 65V or higher range in the
morning after sitting all night. The first acceleration brings the
pack voltage down to 61V or less.

I just went out and measured the voltage on the two cells I used in my
3.4-4V test set. One of them has been sitting for 22 hours and is at
3.873V and one has been sitting 3 days or so and is at 3.777V. This is
with no load and my shop is at about 60F.

I've been using 3.4V as my nominal voltage knowing it will sag a
little under load. If your controller is disconnected from your pack
during charge and you only charge to say 3.8Vpc then you aren't
leaving too much unused charge capacity (assuming you aren't finishing
with a high current) and it will likely drop from 190V to 180V (50
cells) over night, especially if you have any type of load on your
pack. My DC-DC converter has an always on side to it. If you regularly
charge to 3.6V and only periodically "top balance" then it wouldn't be
an issue going with 50 cells. From my measurements I don't think an
unused 0.7% is an issue. It may even lengthen the calendar life of the
pack. Remember that in my tests I left the cells on for an extended
period of time to reach my desired start voltage for the tests. I
think the last test I left the cell hooked up over night.

I'm still learning but HTH,

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Pestka, Dennis J


> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > David;
> >
> > Based on the data you've collected, maybe you can help me understand
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Hi Dennis,

The important number to consider is the max voltage during charge.

(Odyssey lead acid batts use a finishing charge of 14.8 v per batt for example)

Anyway, you need to make sure that whatever equipment you have
connected to your battery pack (controller, dc/dc, heater etc) will
not let the smoke out when your charger is at its maximum voltage
during the charge cycle.

Controllers are usually disconnected from the pack when they are not
running, so it is possible to take the pack a little higher than the
controller's maximum spec as long as you remember to let the voltage
drop back down into the safe zone before starting the controller.

So, to answer your question, get the peak voltage specs for each piece
of equipment on your pack. Take the lowest of these values - this is
your safe maximum voltage.
(eg 180V for your controller)
Take the peak charge voltage of the cells you are considering.
(eg 4.0V)
180 / 4.0 = 45 - You can safely charge 45 cells to 4.0v per cell.

45 x 3.2 = 144 - Your pack will have a nominal voltage of 144V

Mark

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Pestka, Dennis J


> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > David;
> >
> > Based on the data you've collected, maybe you can help me understand
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

I have contemplated this a lot myself and came to the conclusion that it
depends on whatever is your limit.
For me The charger can handle higher or lower so no issue but the dc-dc
and emeter need to be considered.

I was worried becasue I have a higher voltage pack and I think the error
in approximation compounds

so 288V of lead is 24 12V modules. But 12V is dead. Really we look at is as
Equalize + 10% = 389 (374 is about as high as I
have gone)
End of charge 14.77/each = 355
nominal 12.88 = 307 the OCV voltage
after charge and settle
cruise at 100A ~280V down
End of Discharge 10.5/each = 252

looking at lithium
max 3.65 97 modules
nom 3.2 96 modules
cruise 3.0 291V if 97, ok LiFePo4 is stiffer. That is good
min 2.5 100 modules, but if I used 97, i could go
lower or just change my ,im to 2.6

So i would probably go with 96 modules. and that works out to 4 lithium
cells for every 6 lead acid cells
ie 4 liFePo4 = one 12V battery and that tracks with what has seem to
become the defacto standard.

So is it your dc-dc that will give up the ghost if you raise the end of
charge voltage or will it brown out at a lower end of discharge voltage
that is possible but not a good idea anyway?


> David;
>
> Based on the data you've collected, maybe you can help me understand
> something I've been struggling with.
>
> My 156 nominal pack, 12V x 13 batteries usually sets fully charged at ~
> 167V - 12.85V per battery.
> My Raptor controller is limited to 180VDC max.
>
> If these Lithium's ever get to a point where I can afford them, how do
> you calculate how many you would need to replace a 156V nominal pack? 
> Do you use the nominal voltage of 3.2 per cell, finish voltage of 4.0,
> or something in between.
> When you're looking at 49 to 50 cells, this makes a huge difference.
> 49 cells at 3.2 = 157V, and 49 cells at 4.0 = 196V.
>
> Any explanation would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
> Thanks;
> Dennis 
> Elsberry, MO 
> http://www.evalbum.com/1366 
>
> 

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> David Nelson-5 wrote:
> >
> > I did a rough measurement of the amount of energy in a TS-LFP100AHA
> > ...
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Thanks to David and all the other great responses.

Thanks;
Dennis 
Elsberry, MO 
http://www.evalbum.com/1366 




-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Shanab [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v

I have contemplated this a lot myself and came to the conclusion that it
depends on whatever is your limit.
For me The charger can handle higher or lower so no issue but the dc-dc
and emeter need to be considered.

I was worried becasue I have a higher voltage pack and I think the error
in approximation compounds

so 288V of lead is 24 12V modules. But 12V is dead. Really we look at is
as
Equalize + 10% = 389 (374 is about as high as I
have gone)
End of charge 14.77/each = 355
nominal 12.88 = 307 the OCV voltage
after charge and settle
cruise at 100A ~280V down
End of Discharge 10.5/each = 252

looking at lithium
max 3.65 97 modules
nom 3.2 96 modules
cruise 3.0 291V if 97, ok LiFePo4 is stiffer. That is
good
min 2.5 100 modules, but if I used 97, i could go
lower or just change my ,im to 2.6

So i would probably go with 96 modules. and that works out to 4 lithium
cells for every 6 lead acid cells ie 4 liFePo4 = one 12V battery and
that tracks with what has seem to become the defacto standard.

So is it your dc-dc that will give up the ghost if you raise the end of
charge voltage or will it brown out at a lower end of discharge voltage
that is possible but not a good idea anyway?


> David;
>
> Based on the data you've collected, maybe you can help me understand 
> something I've been struggling with.
>
> My 156 nominal pack, 12V x 13 batteries usually sets fully charged at 
> ~ 167V - 12.85V per battery.
> My Raptor controller is limited to 180VDC max.
>
> If these Lithium's ever get to a point where I can afford them, how do

> you calculate how many you would need to replace a 156V nominal pack?
> Do you use the nominal voltage of 3.2 per cell, finish voltage of 4.0,

> or something in between.
> When you're looking at 49 to 50 cells, this makes a huge difference.
> 49 cells at 3.2 = 157V, and 49 cells at 4.0 = 196V.
>
> Any explanation would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
> Thanks;
> Dennis 
> Elsberry, MO 
> http://www.evalbum.com/1366
>
> 



_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> Elithion wrote:
> >
> > ...[why you have to charge to 4.2V]...
> > (And shorted cell life as well, one would think.)
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

according the TS data sheet there is no Cobalt in the battery



> Elithion <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Well.. I have to say it has nothing to do with Cobalt. TS used mixed
cathodes in LCPs. LFP is anohter animal.

The reasons might not be clear yet but empirically it has been proven
that there is better battery performance after 4000 cycles if you do
the 4,25V EOC every now and then. I bet all of us (EV geeks) wish to
have as long lifetime out of the batteries as we can. Chemists and
battery-Dr-persons optimize their thinking in more .. chemical way. We
just wish to be practical and take care of our precious cells.

A123 might be different and I believe it just has something to do with
their powder composition. Particle size is smaller and poweder more
fine. To get more power to hybrid vehicle and tool batteries. TS makes
optimal and reasonable batteries for full BEVs. They just are so
lovely and straight forward piece of tech.


-akkuJukka

(driving with TS cells since 2002...and the love story continues... 


2010/2/5 m gol <[email protected]>:
> according the TS data sheet there is no Cobalt in the battery
>
>


> Elithion <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)
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==


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

>
> Well.. I have to say it has nothing to do with Cobalt. TS used mixed
> cathodes in LCPs. LFP is anohter animal.
>
> The reasons might not be clear yet but empirically it has been proven
> that there is better battery performance after 4000 cycles if you do
> the 4,25V EOC every now and then. I bet all of us (EV geeks) wish to
> have as long lifetime out of the batteries as we can. Chemists and
> battery-Dr-persons optimize their thinking in more .. chemical way. We
> just wish to be practical and take care of our precious cells.
>
> A123 might be different and I believe it just has something to do with
> their powder composition. Particle size is smaller and poweder more
> fine. To get more power to hybrid vehicle and tool batteries. TS makes
> optimal and reasonable batteries for full BEVs. They just are so
> lovely and straight forward piece of tech.
>
>
> -akkuJukka

I was at one time looking into making my own batteries so i did some
research in this area.

First of all understand that the lithium ion battery is an intercalation
battery, The lithium ions get stuffed into the spaces between the doped
anode and cathode.
There is not a chemical change in the electrode material like there is
in lead-acid. There is one in the electrolyte. In the lithium cobalt
days the electrolyte was lithium-hexo-flourate and teh amount of lithium
changed. If you over voltaged or let them get warm, you could
dissassociate the hexo flourate part and make it useless. it also would
end up plugging the spaces inthe anode or cathode and reduced your
capacity. Nowadays the LiFePo4 cells use an different electrolyte, it
is safer(stay away from halogenated rings!) and has less of a problem
with heat.

Also the pre-cursers used to make the anode and cathod are now being
made with more uniform and regulated structure which helps ward off the
blocked pores style problems.

Over charging every time is gonna wear things out, Event he new
electrolyte can only take so much. I suspect that a full charge once in
a while helps warm and expand he structure and otherwise get ions
diffused deeply in and out of the anode and cathode and helps "clean
them out" before they get permanently plugged up.



Funny side note: :Listening to France24 a 24 news channel talking about
the car industry. There was a debate and they were talking about how the
minimum number of units for profitability has gone up to 6 million and
that is one of the reasons we have seen so many mergers and
acquisitions. Because this was in the wake of Toyota's 1-2 punch of bad
luck, the one proponent stated saying basically what I have said, that
the day and age one panicia fuel is gone. He started talking about the
future being in electric cars and mentioned tesla.nissan and BYD. 
Europe "gets" it.

But one of the guys then starts down the negative path and says
something like well we don't know yet about safety, there hasn't been an
accident in an eletric vehicle with acid spraying all over the place....

LOL, idiot

I was also surprise there has not been talk on this list from that
announcement from tesla that they won't make the current roadster past
2011 and don't expect any income form electric cars in 2011. I don't
think it is as severe as the press made it out to be as the way it was
said is vauge.. "no made in current form because of upstream changes at
lotus..." The cut-down version
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2010/01/25/daily109.html

They also got the grant and it is specified that it will be used for
the S-sedan due in 2012 and another factory to make EV parts for other
car makers!






_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

2010/2/5 Jeffrey Jenkins <[email protected]>:
>
>


> > Jukka J=E4rvinen-3 wrote:
> >> The reasons might not be clear yet but empirically it has been proven
> >> that there is better battery performance after 4000 cycles if you do
> >> the 4,25V EOC every now and then.
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

2010/2/5 Jeff Shanab <[email protected]>:
> capacity. Nowadays the LiFePo4 cells use an different electrolyte, it
> is safer(stay away from halogenated rings!) and has less of a problem
> with heat.

The problem is still there. It is not thermal runaway but dead
battery. If someone says LFP cells are just fine to be used without
any electronics.. I would like to see proof of that. So far elevated
heat has destroyed all LiFePO4 cells.

to get bottom of this we have now Tampere Electric Vehicle Center. An
OS project to reveal EVerything about EVs and batteries. There's a
report in Finnish here but you can see some pictures of the place.

This is part of the Ecars. NOW! -community project.


> Also the pre-cursers used to make the anode and cathod are now being
> made with more uniform and regulated structure which helps ward off the
> blocked pores style problems.

Yes. True. And at the same time adding the cost. How much better cells
we need ? 100 Wh/kg and 3000 cycles (70%DOD) are just good. 160wh/kg
and 10000 cycles (80%DOD).. might be already a bit overkill...

> Over charging every time is gonna wear things out, Event he new
> electrolyte can only take so much. I suspect that a full charge once in
> a while helps warm and expand he structure and otherwise get ions
> diffused deeply in and out of the anode and cathode and helps "clean
> them out" before they get permanently plugged up.

over 4000 cycles (100%DOD) were made in continous 1C cycles. That 100%
was between 2 and 4,25 volts. After that there was still about 60% of
the original capacity left.

If that would have been a pack. Say 105 pcs of 40 Ah cells (eCorolla
1.0 set) and linear death curve. ( I know, I know...It's not linear in
real life  but just for fun of it)

105*40*3,2=3D13441Wh

4000 cycles and down from 100 % to 60 % =3D> 80 % AVG DOD.

=3D> 10753 Wh * 4000 cycles =3D> 43 011 200 Wh


Say 140 Wh/km (233wh/mi) =3D> 307223 km (183965 mi)

If 1USD/Ah, 105*$40 =3D $4200

=3D> $1,37/100km (60mi) or 1=80/100km

And this is with HARSH use. Normal driving is not continous and with
full cycles. I would say we can add another 1000-1500 cycles more to
the calculation due that fact.

And energy to move the car: 0,1=80/kWh

14kWh/100km =3D> 1,4 =80/100km

2,4 =80/100km, energy and battery cost.

Looks like we got an ICE killer here. 


My point is: We are there already. Batteries are ready. The rest of
the car and systems on board has to be taken there too. Nothing can
stop us anymore.


-akkuJukka

p.s.- It's friday night, kids in bed, silence.. and this is how I have
fun ? EVDL-junkie 

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
> ...
> to get bottom of this we have now Tampere Electric Vehicle Center. An
> OS project to reveal EVerything about EVs and batteries. There's a
> report in Finnish here but you can see some pictures of the place.
> =

> This is part of the Ecars. NOW! -community project.


Good evening from Tampere,

Some pictures and one of the very first cell-measurements (an very old LFP3=
0, no other cells were at hand when I did the measurement-software) can be =
found from my blog [1]. =


One purpose of Tampere Electric Vehicle Center is to have actual test-data =
of how cells behave in different (freezing or near freezing) temperatures. =
And how they behave with different C-levels at charge/discharge cycle etc. =
And one big issue here is to get some proven "1:1" test data on different c=
ell brands and BMS-systems. Now we have about 5 BMS-systems on the lab that=
we can test and few different cell-sizes (more hopefully coming). On top o=
f this "lab"-testing there will be real-life testing done with our conversi=
ons. All the results will be freely available, just like our "flag-ship", t=
he eCorolla [2] is an OpenSource EV, these will be OpenSource documents and=
test-data.

[1] http://randomev.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/at-tevc-15-1-2010/
[2] http://www.ecars-now.org

With very best regards from Tampere / Finland,

Henry "Henkka" Palonen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20100205/a1fdfde6=
/attachment.html =

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Thanks Henkka for the additional info.

I did forgot to put the link down on my reply 

Here it is:
http://sahkoautoilija.wordpress.com/2010/02/01/tampereen-sahkoautokeskuksen=
-avajaiset-1-2-2010/

-akkuJukka


2010/2/5 Henry Palonen <[email protected]>:
>
> Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
>> ...
>> to get bottom of this we have now Tampere Electric Vehicle Center. An
>> OS project to reveal EVerything about EVs and batteries. There's a
>> report in Finnish here but you can see some pictures of the place.
>>
>> This is part of the Ecars. NOW! -community project.
>
>
> Good evening from Tampere,
>
> Some pictures and one of the very first cell-measurements (an very old LF=
P30, no other cells were at hand when I did the measurement-software) can b=
e found from my blog [1].
>
> One purpose of Tampere Electric Vehicle Center is to have actual test-dat=
a of how cells behave in different (freezing or near freezing) temperatures=
. And how they behave with different C-levels at charge/discharge cycle etc=
. And one big issue here is to get some proven "1:1" test data on different=
cell brands and BMS-systems. Now we have about 5 BMS-systems on the lab th=
at we can test and few different cell-sizes (more hopefully coming). On top=
of this "lab"-testing there will be real-life testing done with our conver=
sions. All the results will be freely available, just like our "flag-ship",=
the eCorolla [2] is an OpenSource EV, these will be OpenSource documents a=
nd test-data.
>
> [1] http://randomev.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/at-tevc-15-1-2010/
> [2] http://www.ecars-now.org
>
> With very best regards from Tampere / Finland,
>
> Henry "Henkka" Palonen
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20100205/a1fdfd=
e6/attachment.html
> _______________________________________________
> General support: http://evdl.org/help/
> Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
> Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
> Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
>

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Interesting battery choice you guys made for your conversion projects ...
where you chose TS, from halfway around the world, over EB right there in
your own country. That's quite an endorsement of TS, and conversely and
more pointedly, not much of one for EB. Although EB doesn't list any prices
on its website, one could infer from your choice of EB over TS that EB's
price is significantly higher than that of TS, more than is justified by
whatever higher degree of quality EB has over TS. Or to put it another way,
TS' quality must have substantially and sufficiently improved (over that of
a few years ago) such that the relative quality/price/value trade-off now
favors TS over EB, and EB's batts are not worth the substantially higher
price premium.

CW




> Henry Palonen wrote:
> 
> Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
> > ...
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Oops, meant to say "your choice of TS over EB", not the other way around
that I said it. (Should do my proof-reading *before* I hit the "Send"
button, not *after*.)

CW


----- Original Message ----- =

From: "Charles Whalen" <[email protected]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v

Interesting battery choice you guys made for your conversion projects ...
where you chose TS, from halfway around the world, over EB right there in
your own country. That's quite an endorsement of TS, and conversely and
more pointedly, not much of one for EB. Although EB doesn't list any prices
on its website, one could infer from your choice of EB over TS that EB's
price is significantly higher than that of TS, more than is justified by
whatever higher degree of quality EB has over TS. Or to put it another way,
TS' quality must have substantially and sufficiently improved (over that of
a few years ago) such that the relative quality/price/value trade-off now
favors TS over EB, and EB's batts are not worth the substantially higher
price premium.

CW




> Henry Palonen wrote:
> 
> Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
> > ...
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Or perhaps the EB factory is still being constructed, as is plainly
stated on their website....

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Charles Whalen <[email protected]> wro=
te:
> Interesting battery choice you guys made for your conversion projects ...
> where you chose TS, from halfway around the world, over EB right there in
> your own country. That's quite an endorsement of TS, and conversely and
> more pointedly, not much of one for EB. Although EB doesn't list any p=
rices
> on its website, one could infer from your choice of EB over TS that EB's
> price is significantly higher than that of TS, more than is justified by
> whatever higher degree of quality EB has over TS. Or to put it another=
way,
> TS' quality must have substantially and sufficiently improved (over that =
of
> a few years ago) such that the relative quality/price/value trade-off now
> favors TS over EB, and EB's batts are not worth the substantially higher
> price premium.
>
> CW
>
>
>


> Henry Palonen wrote:
> >
> > Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
> >> ...
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Also says they've been in business making batts since 2003. So that new
factory construction is apparently an expansion of their facilities.


----- Original Message ----- =

From: "Peter Gabrielsson" <[email protected]>
To: "Charles Whalen" <[email protected]>; "Electric Vehicle Discussion
List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v

Or perhaps the EB factory is still being constructed, as is plainly
stated on their website....

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Charles Whalen <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Interesting battery choice you guys made for your conversion projects ...
> where you chose TS, from halfway around the world, over EB right there in
> your own country. That's quite an endorsement of TS, and conversely and
> more pointedly, not much of one for EB. Although EB doesn't list any
> prices
> on its website, one could infer from your choice of EB over TS that EB's
> price is significantly higher than that of TS, more than is justified by
> whatever higher degree of quality EB has over TS. Or to put it another
> way,
> TS' quality must have substantially and sufficiently improved (over that
> of
> a few years ago) such that the relative quality/price/value trade-off now
> favors TS over EB, and EB's batts are not worth the substantially higher
> price premium.
>
> CW
>
>
>


> Henry Palonen wrote:
> >
> > Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
> >> ...
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

I'd say cost is the main reason TS (or SE) are chosen over local =

products, more than any other reason - closely followed by availability =

to the public.

Leslie



Charles Whalen wrote:
> Also says they've been in business making batts since 2003. So that new
> factory construction is apparently an expansion of their facilities.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- =

> From: "Peter Gabrielsson" <[email protected]>
> To: "Charles Whalen" <[email protected]>; "Electric Vehicle Discussion
> List" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v
>
> Or perhaps the EB factory is still being constructed, as is plainly
> stated on their website....
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Charles Whalen <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> =

>> Interesting battery choice you guys made for your conversion projects ...
>> where you chose TS, from halfway around the world, over EB right there in
>> your own country. That's quite an endorsement of TS, and conversely and
>> more pointedly, not much of one for EB. Although EB doesn't list any
>> prices
>> on its website, one could infer from your choice of EB over TS that EB's
>> price is significantly higher than that of TS, more than is justified by
>> whatever higher degree of quality EB has over TS. Or to put it another
>> way,
>> TS' quality must have substantially and sufficiently improved (over that
>> of
>> a few years ago) such that the relative quality/price/value trade-off now
>> favors TS over EB, and EB's batts are not worth the substantially higher
>> price premium.
>>
>> CW
>>
>>
>>


> Henry Palonen wrote:
> >>
> >> Jukka J=E4rvinen kirjoitti 5.2.2010 kello 23.35:
> >> =
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

I have a TS factory charger that came with the 12 40ah cells I bought last
year (mounted in a scooter).
They told me the finish voltage was 43 volts. That comes to 3.583 volts per
cell.
I have been have trouble recently with 2 cells jumping up to 4.45 votls
before charging is finished.
Neal
-- 
View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Energy-in-a-TS-LFP100AHA-between-3-4-4v-tp1459547p1554938.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

What BMS are you using? Does your BMS include cell balancing? If you 
don't have a BMS and don't have cell balancing, then that is the problem.
Check out these balancers: 
http://www.evworks.com.au/index.php?product=BMS-CM060-V6 as they are 
quite cheap and they use this BMS specific for scooters: 
http://www.evworks.com.au/index.php?product=BMS-MCU-GC

Leslie







> shred wrote:
> > I have a TS factory charger that came with the 12 40ah cells I bought last
> > year (mounted in a scooter).
> > They told me the finish voltage was 43 volts. That comes to 3.583 volts per
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> David Nelson-5 wrote:
> >
> > I did a rough measurement of the amount of energy in a TS-LFP100AHA
> > cell I received in the EV Components order which arrived at the end of
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

The BMS I'm using are 2 Chargery Power DB8 units.
They use a 300ma draw to bring the higher cell down to within a .01 volt of
the lower cells.
I have tried different (lower amperage) chargers but it doesn't make a
differance.

Neal
-- 
View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Energy-in-a-TS-LFP100AHA-between-3-4-4v-tp1459547p1555378.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Thank you for the similar test, Jeff. My guess is that since I hand
recorded my data and assumed the voltage and current were constant
over the entire interval that I would get a capacity value higher than
actual. I wanted an upper limit so I knew I wasn't missing out on much
energy capacity. I would love to have something like a LabJack.

So it looks from your tests that for moderate charging currents
(10-40A) at the end of charge there isn't really much energy capacity
lost over finish charging at say 0.5A. With my tests I charged the
cell to my "beginning" voltage by letting the current taper into the
mA range.

I'd like to see those documents David Beard sent you, if possible. I'm
really curious about that. My BMS modules shunt/HVT at 4.00vpc. Maybe
I should be charging to that point on every charge. When I picked up
my TS cells at evcomponents I also picked up a single cell charger for
them which charges to 4.2V. Maybe they are on to something there. Like
you say, it can be expensive to do the testing of different charge
methods to get longest life.

-- 
David D. Nelson
http://evalbum.com/1328

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> shred <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The BMS I'm using are 2 Chargery Power DB8 units.
> > They use a 300ma draw to bring the higher cell down to within a .01 volt of
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)
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----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Does your BMS have any control over the charger?
One of the most important aspects of a BMS system is the ability to
disconnect the charger if a cell goes high (above ~4v).
4.45v is in definate capacity loss territory.

Matt 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of shred
Sent: Monday, 15 February 2010 5:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v


I meant that charging them slow at 2.5 amps the 2 problem cells that close
to the finish of charging are still jumping up to 4.45 volts. The charger
that came from TS and is supposed to be made by them charges to 43 volts
(for 12
modules) The other 2.5 a charger is for AGM lead and chargers to 42 volts.
My BMS is always active.
Any time there is a cell that is more then .01 volts higher then the lowest
cell it will shunt 300ma out of that cell until it reaches less then .01
volts from that lowest cell.
Once I ride the bike just a few seconds the voltage drops in those high
cells in line with the others. Or if I leave it sit for a few hours the BMS
takes them down.
But I have to watch the charging process now.
Also under warranty I had one of the problem cells replaced thinking the
cell was bad. I put the new battery in the same location and it too now is
running up to 4.45 volts.
None of the other batteries are showing this problem.
I'm told not to take them over 3.7 volts during charging.
In fact my BMS has an auditable alarm that starts beeping when any cell
reaches 3.7 volts or higher.
So my problem are cells 9 & 12 from most - to most +.
Neal

--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Energy-in-a-TS-LFP100AHA-between-3-4-4v-tp1459547p15554
13.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/ Subscription options:
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2669 - Release Date: 02/14/10
04:35:00

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Hi,

For standard long charge, TS recommends charging their cells (ambient of 20C
+/- 5D) to at constant current until the cell has reached 4.2v and then
switching to constant voltage until current has dropped to 5% of current
initially used.

They also recommend 0.5CA for best results, although 0.5CA is almost
certainly not possible for most with higher AHA cells - they do list 0.015CA
charging as acceptable though.

So if following their recommendations, and using 1.5A current for charging
the 100AHA cell, your charger should charge at a constant 1.5A until the
cell is at 4.2v, then your charger should switch to constant voltage
charging until charging current drops to around 0.075A. At that point the
cell will be fully charged according to TS recommendations.

All this information is available in the TS instruction manual, so please do
not take my word for it, read the manual and interpret the instructions for
yourself 

regards,
Leslie





On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Jeffrey Jenkins <[email protected]


> > wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Leslie,

I read those instructions but I got the impression that they were for
the initial charge after receiving them from the factory.

Is there any cycle life and calendar life data on charging them to
different voltages?




> WRX STI <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > For standard long charge, TS recommends charging their cells (ambient of =
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Hi,

They are the recommended charging settings. TS states if those charging
recommendations are followed, you "should" get ~3000 charges from the cells
- if not followed, the lifecycle will be less.

Leslie






> David Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Leslie,
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> WRX STI wrote:
> >
> > For standard long charge, TS recommends charging their cells (ambient of
> > 20C
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> Jeffrey Jenkins wrote:
> 
> >
> > WRX STI wrote:
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

That sounds great, Roger. From your description it looks like you
could easily program it to have a different charging scheme on
different cells. If someone wanted to do the testing they could charge
different banks of cells to different ending voltages and "balance"
points to see which method resulted in longest cell life.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Roger Heuckeroth
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>


> Jeffrey Jenkins wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> WRX STI wrote:
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Roger, this sounds like an intriguing design. When you have it documented, 
please consider submitting it for the EVDL library.

http://evdl.org/lib/

All you have to do is email it as an attachment to my private email address 
(see below). 

Thanks!

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Note: mail sent to "evpost" an "etpost" addresses will not 
reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my 
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

OK. Will do.



> EVDL Administrator wrote:
> 
> > Roger, this sounds like an intriguing design. When you have it
> > documented,
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Correct. Its will be completely customizable through programming. 
The programming software is free, and easy to learn.



> David Nelson wrote:
> 
> > That sounds great, Roger. From your description it looks like you
> > could easily program it to have a different charging scheme on
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> >When I'm finished developing this BMS + Charger I'm going
> >to make is open source, so anyone can make the same thing
> >or a modified version of it. Best part is no assembling
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> Cor van de Water wrote:
> 
> > Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> >> When I'm finished developing this BMS + Charger I'm going
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> 
> >
> > Anyone suggest a good site (preferably free) where I can document it?
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Documents to

http://ecars-now.wikidot.org

please. 

Or just email them to me. I'll put them up there.


-jukka



Roger Heuckeroth <[email protected]> kirjoitti 15.2.2010 kello 
21.13:

>
>


> Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Anyone suggest a good site (preferably free) where I can document it?
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Jukka, that link does not work.





> Jukka Jarvinen wrote:
> 
> > Documents to
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Hi Neal,

> The BMS I'm using are 2 Chargery Power DB8 units.
> They use a 300ma draw to bring the higher cell down to within a .01 volt of
> the lower cells.
> I have tried different (lower amperage) chargers but it doesn't make a
> differance.
The DB8 packaging lies.
The balancing resistors are 6 120ohm in parallel. At 4.25V that's only 
210mA...
Also, they will maintain the same voltage across all batteries -- all 
the way up to 4.6V as I discovered.

I have a drop-in replacement (same footprint and connector) you can use 
which also wires in to disable the charger AC input. Give me a buzz 
off-list if you are interested.

Cory

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)
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----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

It does have control over the charger but I can't use that function because the cell balancer only works on up to 8 cells. 

I have 12 cells so I would need two 18 volt chargers running through the two balancers. Right now I have balancer #1 wired to batteries 1-8 & balancer #2 wired to batteries 5-12. Crossing them over makes sure that they balance across the whole pack.

That I just posted. 

How much are your replacement units?

Would I still need 2 of them?

Neal

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Cory Cross-2 [via Electric Vehicle Discussion List] 
To: shred 
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v


Hi Neal, 

> The BMS I'm using are 2 Chargery Power DB8 units. 
> They use a 300ma draw to bring the higher cell down to within a .01 volt of 
> the lower cells. 
> I have tried different (lower amperage) chargers but it doesn't make a 
> differance. 
The DB8 packaging lies. 
The balancing resistors are 6 120ohm in parallel. At 4.25V that's only 
210mA... 
Also, they will maintain the same voltage across all batteries -- all 
the way up to 4.6V as I discovered. 

I have a drop-in replacement (same footprint and connector) you can use 
which also wires in to disable the charger AC input. Give me a buzz 
off-list if you are interested. 

Cory 

_______________________________________________ 
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View message @ http://n4.nabble.com/Energy-in-a-TS-LFP100AHA-between-3-4-4v-tp1459547p1556936.html 
To unsubscribe from Re: Energy in a TS-LFP100AHA between 3.4-4v, click here. 


-- 
View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Energy-in-a-TS-LFP100AHA-between-3-4-4v-tp1459547p1557684.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> On 15 Feb 2010 at 14:06, Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> 
> > Anyone suggest a good site (preferably free) where I can document it?
> 
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Hello,

It should be http://www.ecars-now.org

For our Open Source eBMS [3] we are using 4 different methods for sharing information.

1) First method is source code-repository. That's been hosted by Assembla, at [1] . All our source code get's hosted there, including source-code for all the other EV-components we have developend along the way. It handles all the necessary versioning stuff for our software-developers and keeps things in sync.

2) Second, and most important method nowdays is DropBox [2]. We are using it among our core-team (about 50 active members have contributed so far to DropBox) to actively share information and schema's. Since DropBox represents itself as a standard file-system on our computers, it's very easy and intuitive to use - just work with your files as you'll normally do, and let DP sync them for your team. Easy, and it has proven valuable for our Open Source development. Great feature is that it works with Windows, Mac and Linux, as we have people using all of these. Everything I put to DP's file-structure is almost immediately visible to other team members. I can very easily see latest schema-versions some other member is currently working with etc. No need to upload them to web-server or anything "as complicated" like that. DP seems to support Public-folders too, so anything you put to that folder will be immediately visible in DP's homepage too - so essentially this would be very !
easy way of sharing public data from OS BMS development. This has totally changed the visibility of our documents - now everyone has access to them, also during development of each eComponent.

3) Use of GoogleDocs - we use Google's spreadsheet's to keep track of our TODO's etc. They were chosen since they seem to provide very nice tool for editing tabular data. It supports direct linking as HTML or PDF-files too, so I can easily embedd our TODO-lists to other "static" pages too, as I have done with eBMS TODO [3].

4) Lastly, an "old school" web-page for general view of the project, such as our OS eBMS [3]. I'm not a huge fan of Wiki's for actively developed projects. We started with an standard Wiki for our development notes and sharing platform. Many of us felt it was not intuitive and it "got in the way of workflow". (Besides there seems to be countries where wikidot.com is among banned sites...) Dropbox has proven to be very nice tool for sharing information "as it is", during heavy and active development. Mostly Wiki's and web-pages tend to lag behind actual state of the work. But with DP, everything seems to keep in sync fairly well.

[1] http://www.assembla.com/spaces/ecars_now/trac_subversion_tool
[2] http://www.dropbox.com
[3] http://yty.net/ebms

With very best regards,

Henry "Henkka" Palonen
eCars-Now!

PS. I'm not financially or otherwise linked to DropBox or any other tools I mentioned here - I just tell what we have learned what has worked best with our +50 people Open Source Development team.

Roger Heuckeroth kirjoitti 16.2.2010 kello 0.32:

> Jukka, that link does not work.
> 
> 
> 
>


> Jukka Jarvinen wrote:
> >
> >> Documents to
> >>
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Yeah.  I was typing it with iPod and I thought I just copied a link
from browser.. It seems I did not. Luckily Henkka came in and cleared
the thing out.

Thanks again Henkka !

-Jukka

2010/2/16 Roger Heuckeroth <[email protected]>:
> Jukka, that link does not work.
>
>
>
>


> Jukka Jarvinen wrote:
> >
> >> Documents to
> >>
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Hi Neal,



> shred wrote:
> > It does have control over the charger but I can't use that function because the cell balancer only works on up to 8 cells.
> It only disconnects the black pins, so you could connect a 24V relay
> across the "in" side when you are charging, and use the NC contact for
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> EVDL Administrator wrote:
> 
> > On 15 Feb 2010 at 14:06, Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Jukka-
FYI- That link to ecars-now does not work....
Tom



> Jukka Jarvinen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Documents to
> >
> > http://ecars-now.wikidot.org
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

As Henkka cleared it out it should have been:

"It should be http://www.ecars-now.org"

-Jukka


2010/2/19 Thomas Brannan <[email protected]>:
> Jukka-
> FYI- That link to ecars-now does not work....
> Tom
>
>


> Jukka Jarvinen <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Documents to
> >>
> >> http://ecars-now.wikidot.org
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> Jeffrey Jenkins wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

> It's also worth noting that as far as I know all production EV and PHEV
> manufacturers limit the amount of charge, to preserve the life of the cell.

That may be true but what battery chemistry are they using? How many
are using LiFePO4? Tesla isn't. I don't know about others. The single
cell charger I picked up with my TS-LFP100AHA cells from EV Components
charges to 4.2V. I've been of the mind set that the cell life would be
longer if I didn't charge that high but I am only transferring the
results from other chemistries so it may not be a valid conclusion.

-- 
David D. Nelson
http://evalbum.com/1328

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Jukka - could you please clarify your opinion/findings on the proper charging
method for LFP cells?

I gathered from a previous post of yours (and from e-mail exchanges with
David Beard) that it is necessary to take LFP cells up to 4.20V, at least
every once in awhile if not every charge.

Because there is no usable capacity above 3.40V (more like 3.30V, actually),
it seems a smart BMS/balancer scheme would be to charge the cells up to
4.20V, maybe starting to shunt current at 4.00V, but keep shunting all the
way back down to 3.50V. When I have done this on 200Ah cells it has taken
all of about 15 minutes to drain them from 4.20V back down to 3.50V with a
mere 1A of shunting current.


-- 
View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Energy-in-a-TS-LFP100AHA-between-3-4-4v-tp1459547p1561824.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
General support: http://evdl.org/help/
Unsubscribe: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Usage guidelines: http://evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
Archive / Forum: http://evdl.org/archive/
Subscription options: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Shunt regulating is not a precise method for balancing the cells. That 
is why a bulk charger is set to some lower voltage per cell, like 3.8v 
to 3.9v for the Thundersky batteries. This migitates any overshoot 
through a fully conducting shunt regulator that is still allowing some 
charge current into the battery.

The targeted cell approach such as active charging of a single cell by a 
"smart" charge is more precise and can bring the cell to the 
manufacturer limits more accurately and precisely.

Just as a lead acid manufacturer of an AGM battery will perscribe 
charging to around 14.4v per battery, doing this every time will not not 
hurt the battery. Chronically short charging them all the time will 
actually cause damage to the AGM battery. Doing it on occasion is fine 
as long as you bring the battery to the manufacturer levels every so 
often. I don't think the effect is as pronounced with the Thundersky 
batteries. Whereas with a lead acid pack I personally would only short 
charge the pack a few times before bringing each battery to the 
manufacturer voltage, on the Thundersky cells in the absense of an 
accurate and precise BMS system I would short charge them (to between 
3.65 and 3.9Vpc) to be safe on the order of 30 to 40 cycles and then 
bring each up to manufacturer level of 4.2Vpc

Mike




> Jeffrey Jenkins wrote:
> 
> > Jukka - could you please clarify your opinion/findings on the proper
> > charging
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Mike,

Are you suggesting that if one has a charger which scales back the
current to below the shunting ability of the BMS that it would be
advisable to charge to 4.00vpc, my BMS shunt voltage, on each charge
and then every 30-40 cycles bring each cell up to 4.20V? What
constitutes a cycle? If I only use the top 10% each time does 10
mini-charge cycles constitute a complete cycle? Is there any data to
support the proposed charging recommendation? Does the manufacturer
have data to support their recommendation?

It seems most of us are going with what seems right but there are so
many variables it is difficult to sort out the "best" discharge/charge
regime. I frequently only drive 6 miles and I have an estimated 60
mile range. Will the batteries do better if I charge every 2-3 days or
when I go over 30 miles?




> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Shunt regulating is not a precise method for balancing the cells. That
> > is why a bulk charger is set to some lower voltage per cell, like 3.8v
> > to 3.9v for the Thundersky batteries. This migitates any overshoot
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Lots of questions I can't answer yet without more time studying these 
critters. It's likely the reason there is no definitive "best" 
charging scheme. What I was trying to point out is that even if your 
charger is tapered back down to the shunt regulators capacity you will 
still have some charge going into the battery which is why it is 
imprecise without complex controls to the charger. I was trying to 
suggest that you could bulk charge to a conservative voltage without 
the BMS. The voltage has to be found with experimentation with each 
pack so none of the cells go past that sharp knee. And that in 
general the lifepo4 cells stay balanced well enoug to keep this up for 
30, 40, maybe more cycles. But eventually they will wander and a 
targeted approach to bring them together "might" be cheaper and less 
complex. The long way to do it is to move a single cell charger to 
each cell, or the low cells, or all the cells at once. I don't know 
for sure. Just some food for thought.

Mike
Sent from my iPhone



> David Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Mike,
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Guess I didn't answer your first question. Yes, if you have enough 
control over your BMS to ensure no cell goes over 4.2v then going to 
the manufacturer limit shouldn't harm the batteries at all. But it's 
becaues the current BMS schemes are somewhat imprecise that many are 
recommending conservative values. This is still better than 
overcharging them ;-)

Mike

Sent from my iPhone



> David Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Mike,
> >
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

As you said in the first response I did ask a lot of questions. So it
sounds like charging each cell to 4.2v each time won't hurt the cell
but neither will under charging each cell each time. The problem comes
with a series string when the cells get out of balance with each
other. If the BMS can't deal with the problem correctly there is an
issue of over charging a cell (or over discharging one).

I was watching my BMS boards at the end of a charge cycle when I had
the absolute max pack voltage set at 72V. When the pack was at 71.6V
one of the boards started shunting. After a couple of minutes it shut
off again meaning the shunt current was higher than the charge
current. By the end of charge i never saw all of the boards shunting
all at once. They just cycled on and off. My BMS boards turn on at
4.00V and turn off at 3.98V. The turn on and off point is very abrupt.
They don't gradually start shunting as some bms systems do.



> Mike Willmon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Guess I didn't answer your first question. Yes, if you have enough
> > control over your BMS to ensure no cell goes over 4.2v then going to
> > the manufacturer limit shouldn't harm the batteries at all. But it's
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

How much shunt current do they handle? Does your charger 
automatically taper back to keep from overpowering the shunt? Meaning 
like the charger is only down to 2 amps but the shunts full on only 
handle 1A? In this case you're still putting 1A into the cell which is 
just about full.

Sent from my iPhone



> David Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > As you said in the first response I did ask a lot of questions. So it
> > sounds like charging each cell to 4.2v each time won't hurt the cell
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

Another point to consider is the LiFePO4 manufacturers all ship and recommend
storing the cells at half charge.



> David Nelson-5 wrote:
> >
> >> It's also worth noting that as far as I know all production EV and PHEV
> >> manufacturers limit the amount of charge, to preserve the life of the
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

That is essentially the approach behind my BMS. Using a bank of mini 
relays I can balance each cell individually with a single cell 
charger. The balance is only done occasionally on an as needed basis.



> Mike Willmon <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Lots of questions I can't answer yet without more time studying these
> > critters. It's likely the reason there is no definitive "best"
> ...


----------



## EVDL List (Jul 27, 2007)

My BMS boards handle 0.5A of shunt current. Right now my charger just
cuts back when it approaches the max pack voltage set point. It is a
Zivan NG1 with a charging profile for Trojan T-875s. I played with the
voltage pot on the charger to get the desired cutoff point. I don't
know what its lowest current ability is but I know that it will cut
back to pull only 6W or less from the wall. Maybe it is 0A at its
lowest. Right now I don't have feedback from the BMS boards to control
the charger. I have coming a latching relay to go in the AC line which
will turn off the charger when a BMS board hits the HVC. I just sent
an email asking the designer/builder, Black Sheep Technology, if the
relay controller could monitor the charge current and only turn off
the charger if the current is over 0.5A when a board hits HVC. The
boards I'm using are these:
http://www.black-sheep.us/product_info.php?cPath=3D80_103&products_id=3D136




> Mike Willmon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > How much shunt current do they handle? Does your charger
> > automatically taper back to keep from overpowering the shunt? Meaning
> > like the charger is only down to 2 amps but the shunts full on only
> ...


----------

