Showing posts with label ts-lfp100aha. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ts-lfp100aha. Show all posts

Monday, January 17, 2011

A year with LiFePO4 batteries: What Have I Learned?

One year ago today I took my first drive in my Gizmo with 36 TS-LFP100AHA installed in a 2p18s configuration. See the blog posts in January and February 2010 for my setup. In that time I have learned quite a bit about LiFePO4 batteries. Playing with them, using them, measuring them, keeping an open mind about how they operate and avoiding the "conventional wisdom" about batteries are all good things to do. Being a physics type is also good but not necessary. It just means there is a chance that you learned that you record everything even if you don't think it is useful and especially if it doesn't support your current notions about things or something you are trying to prove.

In the past year the odometer went from 8640 miles and now sits at 14139 miles: one mile short of 5500 miles.
I also saw this nice pattern of numbers on the odometer! The aluminum over the speedometer was an attempt to shield sun from hitting the display. Sometimes I can't see how fast I'm going and don't want to get a ticket. I've since removed it since the CycleAnalyst has a speed function I can use for the infrequent times I need it.

I spent $46.80 on electricity to recharge and used 993.43kWh from the wall (representing 12,365.37Ah) to travel that distance. This comes out to a conservative average of 137Wh/mile from the battery pack. I'll post about current efficiency values in another post. I see a trend and think it might be tied to pack temperature so I'll post in the summer about it.

This is a CycleAnalyst from ebikes.ca showing the total cycle count, total Ah and total Miles driven. The miles is higher than my speedometer gives. I'm assuming that the CA is more accurate because I calculated it from 10 tire rotations but I wanted to keep a consistent count from before I installed the CA and after so I only record the speedometer values. Also, the difference in the CA total of 12,544Ah and my total of 12,365Ah is due to the fact that the CA records total Ah that the batteries deliver whereas my figure is from adding up all the individual trip Ah which include regenerative braking. From this you can calculate that regenerative braking gained me 1.4% range over this time period. [edit: I just realized that 7597Ah came from back calculating for the time I did not have the CA and are based on the kWh used to charge from the wall. A more accurate representative result would be a 3.7% gain from regen.] Not a whole lot, however I have gone over three times farther on this set of brake pads than I did before I had variable regenerative braking so it is definitely a benefit. Not to mention the ability to come down steep long hills and not have brake fade and the much quicker panic stops than without.

The Cycle Count of 290 represents the total number of times I have charged the battery pack until it was full and I reset the CA. The Ah value is not always exactly at zero after a charge. It ranges from a fraction of an Ah above or below to as much as 2.5Ah above or below depending on how long the drive was and how much the battery temperature changed. I think it is also dependent some what on how closely calibrated it is to the shunt. With my 500A shunt the CA only claims accuracy to 0.1A so at the end of charge when the Zivan ramps down to near zero amps it may or may not register on the CA. The 290 cycles represent an average (mean) discharge per cycle of ~21% with a median of 13.6%. The highest discharge amount was 89.9% (179.6Ah) and the smallest was 4.34% (8.68Ah). At this rate I hope the pack will last 10 years. Even then I will probably have spent more than if I had stuck with 6V flooded Golf Cart batteries. However, the utility of the vehicle is so much better that it is hard to put a price on it. Not to mention I am getting valuable information on a $5000 pack rather than on a $20,000 pack in a full size car. (I need lots of range for what I do with my car so I would need a much larger pack even though a $6500 pack would work well in a small car.)

One thing is for sure, when the range is more than 20 miles it is much easier to drive more. There were several times where the 20 mile range of lead acid were not enough for what I needed. I remember heading out to one of my rental houses to show it to someone and getting most of the way there and realizing I had forgot the key. I had to turn around and go home to get it. Unfortunately I didn't have enough range to make the trip a second time so I had to take an ICE vehicle. With LiFePO4 and an easy 60-70 mile range meant those situations are no longer an issue. I've driven from Kelso to Battle Ground, WA to work on a rental house knowing I would be there long enough to charge enough to make the return trip.

If you read my February 2010 blog and the two comments you will see there was talk about my original ending charge of 71V or about 3.94vpc. Jack Rickard correctly pointed out that charging this high would shorten the life of my cells. On July 28, 2010 at 11,365 miles on the odometer I installed my newly reprogrammed Zivan NG1 with the #612 charging algorithm for 19 LiFePO4 cells. I did adjust the voltage trim pot up so now the ending charge is 69.6-69.7V. At the same time I installed the remaining two pairs of cells. I top balanced all the cells using my BMS boards which shunt at 4.00V. This means my pack voltage was at 80V when I was finished. My DC-DC won't come on at this voltage and neither will my Sevcon PP745 controller. I used a bank of light bulbs I built as a load to discharge batteries and brought the voltage down to below 70V. This took very little time since there is very little energy above 3.45V with this particular chemistry.

One might be wondering about the top balancing if my BMS boards don't shunt until 4.00V. After all, 69.7V/20 cells = 3.485vpc. Well, since there is so little energy above 3.45vpc (with my 18 "cell" 200Ah pack it was only enough to get me up to about 15mph from a stop) there is really nothing lost by stopping earlier in the charging curve. The Zivan is incredibly consistent in stopping at its programmed cutoff voltage. It even will shut down if for some reason it can't control the voltage. I found out quite by accident on the first pack charge I did. Being naive about the characteristics of these batteries I went to the store thinking that since the voltage hadn't risen much it would still be a while before they were full. When I got back the charger was beeping an error code which turned out to be "unable to control voltage" or some thing like that. Zivan chargers may not be too great to end user adjustment but I sure am thankful that they just plain do what they are supposed to. They are truly plug-n-play if you don't make any changes to your battery pack. Another point about the small amount of energy at the top of the voltage curve. I've watched the voltage at the end of charge. From the time the charger first starts to ramp back on the current it is only 10-15 minutes before it is putting less than 500mA. This last phase (yellow light) of the charging curve lasts for 1 hour. Even if it continuously put in 500mA (it doesn't) that would only be 0.5Ah into a 200Ah pack. It comes on periodically and draws only 40W from the wall and that drops down rather quickly to under 20W and then shuts off. I'm sure if I didn't have any parasitic loads on the battery pack that it would shut off and not come on again during the remainder of the final charging curve.

Back to top balancing: I was wondering too what would happen. If these batteries drift I should start seeing it after a few charge cycles. I started recording the voltage at the end of charge when the charger was not charging. This was during the yellow light phase of charging. I could see the wall power on my kill-a-watt meter so I knew when the charger was not putting anything into the pack. When not running the charger draws about 4W. I can also hear when the charger shuts off and turns back on because I hear a high pitched squeak which is probably the PWM of the charger coming on or turning off. Other than the first time I took cell readings the charger was off. Below is a screen capture of the spreadsheet I'm using to record the information.

The first column lists the cell number and location in the pack. Cell pairs 19 and 20 were installed after the charger was reprogrammed. They only had about 3 cycles on them before being merged into the pack. I did have a mishap with pair #19 a day or two after installing them. I missed tightening one of the bolts which held the straps between this pair and pair #20. It had worked its way up about a centimeter or so. Amazingly, there was no melted metal but one cell of the pair took several Ah to bring it up to the rest. What I think was happening was that the high currents were draining the cell but the charge currents were not getting into it very well. It is possible that since I am using brass bolts rather than the stainless steel ones supplied by TS I avoided problems. I tightened this bolt down and charged this one pair with my bench top power supply. You will see that it is one of the higher voltage pairs, though not the highest, of the set. The next columns are a date followed by High/Low. the High/Low column shows an H for the highest cell and an L for the lowest cell for that day's reading. At the bottom of this column is the difference between these two values and represents the maximum voltage range of the pack. The cell immediately below the individual voltages is the sum of the voltages, below that is the total pack voltage as given my my ExTech Instruments EX830 multimeter. This is an awesome mid-range meter, BTW. Note that the ending voltage for the first reading is 70V. I lowered the ending voltage of my charger after this to keep my DC-DC happier. The next cell in the spreadsheet is the Watt reading on the Kill-a-Watt meter, below that is the pack temperature, in degrees Celsius, by an inexpensive indoor-outdoor digital thermometer. I placed the outdoor probe between the middle rows of batteries against the case. It is held in place by a folded up piece of closed cell foam to try to get a more accurate case temperature. The temperature was generally stable by the time the charging was finished so this value likely is very close to the internal temperature of the cells. The whole box is surrounded by 3/4" hard pink insulation foam as sold by home hardware stores. The box is by no means air tight but generally there is not much wind in my carport. Finally, the last cell is the average Volts per cell value.

As you can see, the voltages don't move around very much. The high and low cells don't change much. (Note that the dates are farther apart later in the table.) As Jack Rickard and others told me I'd get bored taking these measurements and eventually quit. Well, I like data and I'm out to test out a hypothesis that has been forming in my mind for a while. I'm no longer convinced I need a cell level BMS. I think a half pack voltage comparison is enough to spot a dying cell and take care of it. Before you tune me out read on.

After watching Jay Whitacare's talk to a group of Carnegie Mellon students and professors about their EV experiments I became less convinced that the risks of a cell level BMS were lower than a string level monitoring system. See the video linked to on the ChargeCar website or on the EVTV.ME blog. When I read "Shuttle reaction" in the comments to Jack Rickard's January 9, 2011 blog it finally hit me why these batteries are so different from other chemistries. I have since read about it in other places. It was hinted at in one of the responses to an EVDL post I made asking why my efficiency from the wall numbers were so much better with LiFePO4 batteries than with lead acid. A poster mentioned a secondary reaction in lead acid that didn't participate in the storage of energy but used energy in the reaction. I believe this was the shuttle reaction which provides the self discharge of so many other batteries. Lithium ion batteries in general and LiFePO4 in particular merely move a Lithium ion from one plate to the other during charge and back on discharge. There really isn't a chemical reaction, per say, taking place to make this happen. Barring a mechanical defect in the cell there is no way for self discharge to happen! When people put BMS boards on each cell, this then becomes the discharge mechanism for the cell, not the cell it self. If you have any LiFePO4 cells in storage make sure there is nothing on the terminals. If you want just check the voltage every 6 months or so. Unless there is something on the cell allowing charge to transfer between the terminals you will be pleasantly surprised at or bored with the fact that the voltage doesn't change much if at all, even out to the thousandth of a volt.

Another source for this information is on Gold Peak Industries (Taiwan), Ltd. website. In section 3.8 of the linked pdf it states,
“There is no shuttle-based self-discharge reaction in the Lithium Ion cell like that found in the NiMH and NiCd. As the cell ages, the self-discharge eventually becomes zero. Initially the cell suffers from irreversible capacity loss. This is a reaction of the electrolyte with the the active components if the cell. It occurs more rapidly with increasing temperature and cell voltage. For this reason, cells should not be stored fully charged at temperatures approaching 60°C. Optimally they should be stored at 25°C or less and between 30-50% state of charge. The lower limit is chosen because they are often stored in packs witch circuitry that demands a small drain on the battery. When one considers the circuitry needed for li-Ion, it becomes the most important source of self-discharge.”
Note that it states that the lower limit, 30%SOC, is chosen because so many put BMS circuits on them. Leave them off means almost zero self discharge. Furthermore, as the cell ages, what ever self-discharge there may be drops to zero any way. It sounds like the cells will become less and less prone to drift apart in any particular given pack.

Another sentence in the above quote caught my eye, "Initially the cell suffers from irreversible capacity loss." This may explain why my efficiency numbers were so high right after I installed my pack. Last winter wasn't as cold as this winter but it may be that as the capacity dropped in my cells it took a little more energy to put back what I used. Another, more likely, possibility is that each time I drove I didn't put back as much energy as I took out. I didn't have an amp hour counter at the time so I have no way to support either possibility. This may cause you to wonder how I came up with my total Ah numbers for my total. What I did was average the number of Ah/kWh out of the wall for the first dozen or so charge cycles after receiving the CA and then calculated the Ah used for all previous drives. The total I arrived at, number of cycles and miles driven were then entered into the CA to give reasonably accurate lifetime pack values.

So, what about my existing BMS boards? As you can tell I haven't been using the top balancing function of them. I think Black Sheep Technology did a very good job of designing a robust board so I don't expect any failures as some people have experienced with other products. These batteries do sag significantly when cold, so that a 1.5C discharge rate was enough to get the low voltage trip, LVT, to sound my low voltage alarm even though the pack was fully charged and had less than 1Ah removed. The total pack voltage was in the range of 58V so the 2.93 LVT value leads me to believe that maybe all boards were sending the alarm and not just a few. This isn't a big issue except that I'm about to install a switch to turn off the siren I installed so I'm not bothered by it when the pack is cold. If I forget it is off I may reverse a cell without realizing it. Or, I might get complacent and merely ignore the warning as a false positive and still kill a cell. I need to either remove the boards or at least the siren and install another type of monitoring system or leave the boards and install another type of monitoring system.

I'm planning on keeping the boards and installing another monitoring system. Why would I want to do this? Well, I could be asking for trouble but I don't expect my particular BMS boards to short out and drain a cell. They could quit working and not alert me to an over voltage or under voltage condition but I don't expect that either. The most likely failure would be the three wire connecting jumper wires running from board to board. If this happens they would fail to send the appropriate signal to alert me. I'm planning on buying or building and installing a Lee Heart type Batt-Bridge circuit. The difference is that I will either install a meter with zero at the center and have the needle swing to one side or the other if the two haves of the pack don't have the same voltage or I'll have a bar of LEDs where the middle one is lit and the ones to one side or the other will light up to indicate pack imbalance. The benefit of this type of circuit is that I can see what is going on under different load conditions. It is possible that under little or no load that the pack is balanced but that under load a weak cell will drop more than the others. I can then look for this cell knowing it is in one half or the other of the pack. It would also be possible to hook up a circuit to this which would turn off the charger on a pack imbalance condition during charging in case a bad cell wasn't caught before hand.

By having both systems in place, the cell level BMS and the Batt-Bridge type circuit, I can see what system gives me the information I need first. If the Batt-Bridge doesn't warn me before the BMS then it may not be the best method. If, the BMS doesn't warn me before the Batt-Bridge then it may not be the best method. If they warn me at the same time then the Batt-Bridge is the winner because it has fewer connections to the pack, only three wires, and it cost significantly less than the BMS system. Furthermore, it has fewer points of failure. It won't drain a single cell in the case of a short and it won't heat up from shunting current and potentially lead to a fire. While I hope I don't need either one this will hopefully provide one more data point to either support or deny the "conventional wisdom."

I hope this helps someone who is trying to decide how to manage their pack of LiFePO4 batteries in their EV. Moving to Lithium is a huge step up from using lead acid. It has very different characteristics than lead acid and what you learned about lead acid or other chemistries in the past needs to be either forgotten in its entirety and relearned for LiFePO4 or you need to re-check all previous notions against data for this exciting battery technology. If someone tells you that you have to do such and such or use this or that just ask, "how do you know that? What data do you have to support that?" You will be glad you did.

[EDIT: 01-19-2011 Be sure to read the comments. Also, if you didn't go read Jack Rickard's January 9, 2011 blog be sure you do and read comment #85 posted January 19, 2011]

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Efficiency differences

When I bought this Gizmo in August 2006 it came with 6 Trojan T-875 8v batteries which were 1-2 years old. One of the things I did from the beginning was to use a Kil-a-Watt meter to record the energy I pulled out of the wall. I wanted to know how much it was costing me to charger my car and to see what the efficiency was. My regular commute is 4.4 miles with an elevation change of about 450 feet, most of that is in the span of about a mile. Sometimes my Wife drives the Gizmo to work and her commute is 9 miles. I mention this because with lead acid batteries and the Zivan NG1 charger I have, every charge cycle includes an equalization phase were the batteries are gently over charged to help all of the cells reach the same state of charge. This means that with shorter drives the wasted energy is not spread out over as many miles. Furthermore, the hill climb at the end of my commute where I would routinely see 250 battery amps, a less efficient current to pull since so much energy is lost to heat, would also not be spread out over as many miles as a longer commute would give.

From August 2006 through August 26, 2009 I used the Trojan T-875 batteries. On July 29, 2009 I didn't realize the range of the pack had diminished so far and ended up reversing a cell in one of the batteries. I never was able to revive it. At that point I took the Interstate Batteries U2200UTL pack out of Gizmo #26 I purchased last summer from Galactic Pizza in Minneapolis, MN and installed it in Gizmo #31 and used them until January 18, 2010 when I installed the TS-LFP100AHA pack. (Gizmo #26 needs extensive restoration.) BTW, if you are in Minneapolis go to Galactic Pizza and get some pizza. It is excellent! Tell them that the guy from Washington who bought one of the Gizmos sent you. Besides, you will be supporting a business which uses EVs to deliver pizzas as long as weather permits.

Note that the energy values below are all as measured from the wall so include charging inefficiencies.

2006
Total Miles: 967
Total kWh: 272.81
Average miles/kWh: 3.54
Average Wh/mi: 282.1

2007
Total Miles: 2364
Total kWh: 682.15
Average miles/kWh: 3.47
Average Wh/mi: 288.6

2008
Total Miles: 497
Total kWh: 138.53
Average miles/kWh: 3.59
Average Wh/mi: 278.7
(On March 28 I sent the NORM Circuit, which reads the hall effect throttle sensor and sends the appropriate signal to the controller, to Black Sheep Technology to get a replacement built. I didn't realize at the time that I could have kept using the old one with my manual override switch until the new one arrived so I was without a Gizmo until April 2009. The new interface was worth the wait!)

2009 (8V T-875 pack)
Total Miles: 1180
Total kWh: 315.47
Average miles/kWh: 3.74
Average Wh/mi: 267.4

2009-2010 (6V U2200UTL pack)
Total Miles: 1180 (This number isn't a typo. I had to double check it, too.)
Total kWh: 294.24
Average miles/kWh: 4.01
Average Wh/mi: 249.4

2010 (TS-LFP100AHA buddy paired pack)
Total Miles: 823
Total kWh: 135.37
Average miles/kWh: 6.08
Average Wh/mi: 164.5
(January 18, 2010 through March 29, 2010)

There some interesting things I notice about the data. First 2007 showed slightly more energy use per mile than the previous year. The Gizmo came with a 30 tooth drive pulley and in August of 2007 I had to have the motor rebuilt by Jim Hustead of Hi-torque Electric in Redmond, OR. This is the Jim of White Zombie fame and the builder of the Jim-Pulse line of Warp motors. With a 30T pulley the motor was turning too slow to keep it cool. I went to the smallest pulley I could find which was a 22T pulley. This changed the gear ratio from 3:1 to 4.09:1. The motor has been much happier. I think that the build-up of carbon dust and wearing & cracking of brushes may have had something to do with the lower efficiency.

I think it is interesting that even though the T-875 pack was aging that the efficiency showed an improvement over the previous years (except for 2007). When I look at the energy used to charge after my 4.4 mile commute, however, the energy consumption was up slightly from earlier years and similar weather conditions.

When the 6V battery pack was installed I saw right away a drop in energy consumption. At first I was expecting to see the energy consumption increase because I added over 120lbs to the weight of the Gizmo. After some thought, I think the reason that the energy consumption decreased is that the significant increase in plate area meant that the 250A draws actually reduced the current per unit of plate surface area so not as much energy was lost due to resistance. This is definitely a variable one might consider when choosing a battery pack. Lighter is not necessarily going to be more efficient. Of course I only have one data point to support this hypothesis.

The biggest shock :) came when I looked at the energy use with the TS batteries. To go from a best case of 250Wh/mi with the 6V lead acid pack to a tiny 165Wh/mi is incredible! I am including all the energy I've put into the TS pack so that if I don't completely charge the pack on one charge it will be made up for when the pack gets fully charged later. I keep thinking something is wrong. I'm using the same Kil-a-Watt meter I have been using all along. Maybe I should hook a second one in series with the first to see if they both give the same results. I'm going to periodically update the data as I get more use on the pack. The only things I've come up with as to why the efficiency is so much higher is that there is very little wasted energy when charging a Lithium Ion pack. I don't equalize each time. I plan on doing that this summer to see how far out of balance the pack has gotten. I'll probably only equalize once or twice each year since the BMS will alert me to an out of balance cell. One other possibility is that with the higher voltage I went to, the controller and motor are more efficient. I really don't know how much more efficient they are but I assume a little more. On the other hand, I don't drive full throttle as much either so the switching losses would be higher, I'm guessing. Time will tell.

(edit: updated energy consumption & distance values March 31, 2010)

Performance is WAY UP!

I haven't finished installing everything in the Gizmo yet. I still have a little wiring to do on the BMS warning system, I don't have an emeter type device yet, I don't have a latching relay to kill the AC to the charger if something goes wrong, and I don't have the charger installed yet since I'm still fiddling with the finish voltage trim pot. It is finishing at about 71V right now so it isn't going too high for the BMS modules on a balanced pack. [(7-25-2010) see comments below about this ending voltage.] I have 18 "cells" and the BMS modules have a HVT (High Voltage Trip) of 4.00V. When I get things finished, or nearly so, I'll go weigh it at the Airport. A friend of mine is an A&P mechanic. He has some scales he uses to calculate the weight & balance on airplanes. I will post the data along with my CG calculations for the 6V pack and the new pack. Suffice it to say, the Gizmo is much lighter than it was with the lead acid pack.

Each pack of 10 cells with connecting straps & bolts weighs 80lbs I have a total of 36 cells. With the mounting hardware I used I figure this pack weighs about 300lbs. The Interstate Batteries U2200UTL are 62lbs each so 8 of them were 496lbs and this is without the connecting cables. It looks like I was able to reduce the weight buy about 200lbs. This is lighter than with the original Trojan T-875 batteries. They are 63 lbs each so a total of 378lbs.

The 18 "cells" I went to raised the voltage I see to about 61V nominal. After a short run to drain off the top 1% of charge or so the pack sits about 61V. After a several mile run it sits at about 60V. I find that while cruising along at about 125A or so the voltage sags to about 56-57V. A 200A load (this is 1C since I'm using buddy pairs) lowers this to about 55V. This is with the batteries at 45-50°F. Maybe when things warm up they won't sag as much. Even with this, it is much better than with the lead acid batteries.

My top speed on level roads with no wind is about 42 mph. Just after I installed the pack it appeared to be about 45-48mph so maybe the batteries were still warm from being in my shop. With the higher voltage I'm seeing current readings a little lower than before. This is to be expected. When climbing my hill I now only slow to 33mph where before I slowed to 24mph on a fully charged pack. I attribute the climbing performance to a higher voltage and being 200lbs lighter.

After installing the pack I didn't get a chance to back off on the spring tension on my coil-over shocks. I definitely sat higher and it seemed that I could feel every pebble on the road. I think I only had a 1/4" travel before the rear shock was at its maximum extension. I have since reduced the tension a couple of notches but I still ride a little higher and it is still a little stiff. I'm going to reroute the wires going to the motor so that I have more travel before the motor bottoms out against the tub of the Gizmo and the lower the tension in the spring to see how that feels.

Acceleration is much better than before. I have to watch my speed-o-meter to make sure I don't get a speeding ticket now. I can easily out accelerate the other cars on the road now. I'm not drag racing them but just comparing to what the typical driver does when a light turns green. When accelerating with the lead acid pack I almost never saw 400A from the batteries. Now I can pull 400A on every acceleration if I want. I tried bumping up the maximum amperage to the armature to 500A and noticed significant increase in acceleration. I didn't leave it there, however, since I want to stay below 2C on these batteries. I need them to last several years longer than the lead acid batteries did to recoup my investment.

In short. I love having a Lithium Ion battery pack!

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

New Batteries are finally in!

I finally have my TS-LFP100AHA batteries in my Gizmo! I still have some wiring and electronic installation to do but I'm at least driving it. I'll do another post on the performance improvements.

I had my battery box sandblasted and then I painted it with etching primer and coated it with some reasonably durable spray paint. All this time I've been trying to figure out how to mount the batteries without bolting through the bottom of the battery box. There isn't much clearance under the box and seeing the deep scratches on the bottom I felt that if I high-centered on something I could do some damage to the box and possibly the batteries as I sheared off a bolt head or something. After talking to several people I finally settled on the idea of mounting the batteries to a 3/4" sheet of exterior plywood. I made sure to get at least 7 ply so that it would be reasonably stiff. The aluminum box bottom was bowed down about a 1/2" or more and I didn't want a flexible bottom for the batteries to sit on. I put 3/4" of rigid insulation board under the plywood.

Next I needed to figure out some way to bolt the batteries to the board. I didn't want anything conductive at the top of the batteries. Someone suggested wide nylon straps over the center of each string of batteries but I couldn't come up with a way to attach the straps and then a way of tightening them. I tried building a frame around each set with holes to bolt through to the plywood but then I didn't have enough room to fit all the batteries in. I finally ended up with a 3/4" strip of aluminum between each row of batteries and a 3/4" angle aluminum on the ends. the holes you see in the plywood are for some 1/4" x 20 cap head bolts. I installed some Tee nuts in the plywood for the bolts to go into. You can also see the 3/4" angle aluminum I used on each side of the board to hold it down. I put three bolts through each side of the box and through the angle aluminum to hold things in place.

I did several test fits of the batteries to make sure everything was going to fit. Below you can see one of the middle bars. This one is 1/8" thick because I couldn't get 1/4" x 3/4" aluminum bar stock. I finally ordered some from McMaster-Carr because I didn't like how flimsy the 1/8" bar was.
When I test fit the batteries I still had about a 1/4" at each end of the box. I needed a way to make sure that the 3/4" angle aluminum end pieces didn't slip off the narrow ledge of the batteries so I made some 1" x 2" x 3/4" shims and attached them to the angle aluminum at each bolt location. As it turned out I had to use 1/8" on the other side of the box. In the picture below you can also see one piece of the 3/4" insulation installed under the hold down strip.
After thinking about the fact that aluminum conducts heat quite well I decided to look for something else for the shims. I found that McMaster-Carr had some 1/4" ABS plastic so I ordered a 2' piece and replaced the shims as shown below.


Because of voltage limitations I could not fill the whole box with 40 cells. I decided to start with 18 buddy pairs which left a hole. Below is what I did to keep the ends of the hold down straps from slipping off the battery slot edge. I used some aluminum pipe for spacers.

Here is a picture between the batteries. They are tightly packed together and don't seem to move at all when I try to move them out of place. I'll be checking them regularly to make sure the hold down method is working. If it doesn't work, I can use some threaded rod and get some non-conductive rigid material to hold the batteries from the top edge.
Here are the batteries in the battery box before I installed 3/4" insulation around the edges.


Battery straps installed. Notice the orange 1 gauge cable to the front set of 8 cells. I turned around the front set so that the positive end of the pack wasn't against the front edge of the box. The front set of cells is not easily accessible through the battery access hole in the tub of the Gizmo. Since I had to use a cable any way it was an easy thing to do. If you look closely at some of the bolts you will see a little hole in them. This is a tapped hole which the BMS modules will attach with.

The Black Sheep Technology BMS modules are installed and I'm giving the pack the first charge as a pack. Earlier I charged all the cells up to 4.00V with a bench top power supply and then put a load on them until the first BMS module gave a low voltage trip. I then disconnected the batteries and measured their voltages to 3 decimal places and ranked them based on voltage. I paired the highest voltage with the lowest, then the next highest with the next lowest and so on until I had my 18 buddy pairs. I'll check them again in a year or so. While this isn't the best way to measure capacity it is what I had. I used several 500W shop lights and a bank of ceramic base light bases as my load. 100Ah is a lot of energy to dissipate! It took quite a while.
If you look carefully at the photo below and compare it to the one above you will see that I moved a couple of BMS modules in the second row from the back. This is the second row from the bottom of the picture above and second row from the top of the picture below. The reason is that I wanted to get the whole pack to the same SOC and my Zivan NG1 wasn't working too well for that since it wanted to see a 48V pack of lead acid batteries. I used my bench top power supplies to charge two parts of the pack and I didn't know if there would be an issue with both hooked together in series. They are supposed to be able to be put in series or parallel but I accidentally hooked up my battery pack backwards and burned out the series parallel circuitry in my dual power supply unit :(. It will be going in for repair soon. By moving a couple of BMS modules I can now split my pack at the 8 pair mark without having to remove any BMS modules. Two bolts out, remove the connecting strap and I'm done. In the photo below you can see the BMS interconnecting wires. I still have to hook up the +12V, fuse, and HVT and LVT test buttons at one end of the string and the HVT, OK, LVT circuitry to the other end. The small black wire coming in from the top center of the photo goes to the "outdoor" probe of a digital thermometer to measure pack temperature. The blue-green foam piece in the center of the pack is holding the probe against the second row of batteries. The black and red wires which join and trail off the bottom of the picture are to my volt meter. I've been playing around with the voltage trim pot on my Zivan NG1. So far I have it so that it is charging less than 0.5A when the pack hits 71V. I want to stop sooner, however since this is 3.944vpc. If I turn the voltage down sooner then my pack doesn't get fully charged. I may send in the charger to get it reprogrammed.
BTW, the picture above is of the battery pack installed in the Gizmo. That is why you cannot see the front row of batteries.

Coming up...

  • Performance comparison
  • weight change
  • efficiency differences

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Cleaning the Battery Posts

Since aluminum oxide is quite non-conductive I decided to clean all of the battery posts on my new TS-LFP100AHA batteries. You can see the surface oxidation on each of the battery posts in the sample photo below. The post on the left is the negative post, and on the right is the positive.Even though copper oxide is relatively conductive I decided to clean it as well. I preparation to do the cleaning I had ordered a stainless steel wire brush, fine single cut file, and a bottoming spiral M8x1.25 tap for the post threads. I first used the wire brush to clean off each post. I could have stopped there but I wanted to make sure I had a smooth surface for the copper straps to rest against. I put a thin layer of NOALOX on each post and then used my file to smooth off the top of each post. The NOALOX helped keep the aluminum from sticking to hard in the file grooves and also put a thin layer back immediately on the aluminum to minimize oxidation. Using the fine turned out to be a good thing. I found a battery where the center post didn't stick above the nut which holds the post in place. I found the nut on each post significantly looser than on other batteries. I'm glad I discovered this since I wouldn't want the post to allow air inside and/or work loose.

After filing the tops and putting a coat of NOALOX on each post. I then put NOALOX in each hole using a cotton swab. I followed this with the tap then a cotton swab again to get any filings out of the hole followed by NOALOX again. This may have been overkill but I did find that there was a significant amount of inconsistency in the threads. I don't think it would have made a difference in getting the bolts to work but I wanted good conduction to the bolts. I'm using a BMS from Black-Sheep Technology which mounts on top of a brass bolt with a tapped hole for a screw which holds the BMS module. I have the BMS version for the TS-LFP90AHA which has the same post spacing as the 100AH battery. The brass bolt makes sure I get good conduction to the BMS module and having the screw in the bolt makes sure I don't over stress the pcb.

Right now I have the batteries hooked up in two separate parallel strings getting their initial 4.2v charge as required by the TS documentation. I have one string hooked up to my bench top lab power supply and the other set hooked up to a 4.2V smart charger. I initially did a bulk charge up to around 4 vpc using my Zivan NG-1. So far I have pulled well over 14KWh from the wall. [edit: I do not recommend charging any LiFePO4 cell to 4.2V. Even TS has lowered their max voltage to 4.0V. It shortens their life and there is very little energy above 3.45v any way. I'm now only charging to 3.485vpc. See my January 2011 blogs.]

Now I'm working on a way to mount the batteries in the Gizmo battery box. The lead acid batteries were not bolted down, nor was the battery box. It just sat in the Gizmo frame. I don't want the Li batteries bouncing up and breaking a BMS board or something if I hit a big bump.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Lithium Batteries Finally Arrived!

Thanks to the hard work of EV Components I finally have 40 TS-LFP100AHA cells for use in the Gizmo. I placed the order in September 2009 but due to several circumstances out of their control the shipment didn't arrive until now. Fortunately they were able to find a shipper who would ship to Seattle and customs didn't take a full month like it did on earlier shipments. Dave Kois, of EV Components was kind enough to let me drive up to pick them up today. I arrived while the truck was still unloading. They sure have their work cut out for them. Look at all those boxes of cells!

While unloading the forklift ran out of propane so they had to run fill the tank. They are anxious to get an electric forklift so this doesn't happen and also so they don't have to breath the fumes. Below is another picture. You can see the brand new Toyota RAV4 that Dave is converting.

Below are pictures of my cells in my 2000 Honda Insight. It was definitely over gross. I'm glad I'm not that heavy of a person. There wasn't much spring travel left.
The box in the back is the battery box out of the Gizmo. I took it out and had it sand blasted. The bottom and corners were badly eaten by battery acid. It will last much longer with Li batteries in it. I'm going to paint it black inside and out. I'm also planning on plugging the drain holes so that water doesn't get in from the bottom. I still need to put in a splash guard in front of the box so the batteries stay clean and dry. Last time I had the batteries out I put baking soda on the bottom of the box. When I pulled them out the entire bottom was wet with baking soda crystals on the sides of most of the batteries. I determined that most of the water entered from the two front drain holes which are right where the tires would splash water on the box.

Well, I'm off to get my batteries ready to install. I still have several things to do.
  • Primer and paint the battery box
  • drill mounting holes in the battery box to match up with some threaded holes in the frame of the Gizmo so the box doesn't bounce around. Even 500lbs of batteries would bounce on some of the bumps I've hit.
  • clean off the battery posts and coat with NOALOX. I'm going to use a very fine file for this with NOALOX on the file so the aluminum won't have time to oxidize.
  • Run an M8x1.25 bottoming tap down each hole to clean the threads. I'll use NOALOX here too. The BMS I'm planning on using will mount to the top of brass bolts which hold the connecting straps so I want good conductivity through the bolts.
  • connect the batteries up in parallel and give them their 4.2V initial charge. I have a lab power supply I can use. I also picked up a 4.2V Chinoz Smart Charger from EV Components to do this.
  • Rebundle the batteries in the arrangement I need to buddy pair them.
  • finalize my mounting design and mount the the batteries to the battery box.
  • It may not matter much but I'm going to put NOALOX on the ends of all of the connecting straps. They are four layers laminated with some shrink wrap. See the picture below.

I have several other things to do but I'll post about them later.

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Battery failure ==> new pack

This summer my wife drove to work and back and then drove back to near work again to meet me at a store. Unfortunately there was no charging done in between trips. Normally this double trip would not have been a problem. I've gone 20 miles on a charge in the summer before with no problem. Apparently my range has decreased significantly. On my way home my PakTrakr gave me a message that battery #2 needed to be charged. I should have turned around and gone back to the Cowlitz PUD building where there are some EV charge plugs and plugged in for a while. Instead I tried to nurse the Gizmo home but I had one bridge to climb up and over and then 450 feet of elevation to gain on top of that. Well, one cell in battery #2 doesn't bubble on equalize anymore. I think I reversed the cell climbing the hill. Fortunately, my son and I picked up Gizmo #26 in Minneapolis, MN this summer. It had an aging pack of 6V flooded batteries which I've installed for now. I have a pack of TS-LFP100AHA on order from evcomponents.com. They are supposed to arrive the end of November 2009. I hope to have them installed durning my Christmas break.

While I had the batteries out I discovered a couple of things. First, the bottom of the aluminum battery boxes were badly etched from battery acid. I recommend that if you have metal battery boxes that you check them regularly for potential structural problems. Also, the battery box from the Gizmo I picked up in MN had cracked welds on all four corners. The Gizmo had been used as a pizza delivery vehicle so it has significantly more miles than Gizmo #31 does but it is another structural item to check.