TheEEStory.com

News, Reviews and Discussion of EEStor Inc.
EESU Fast Charger Revealed « Consumer Electronics « Industry Applications
 
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 10:50pm #1
Starbuck
EEager
Al_bundy4
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Thu, 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 348

The following 250 KW (480v, 330a) charger for charging EESUs from EEStor was recently revealed:
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/uploads/products/2...

If it's good enough for Jay Leno, it's good enough for me.
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/

Offline


Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 10:57pm #2
richardh68
EEager
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 333

Starbuck wrote:

The following 250 KW (480v, 330a) charger for charging EESUs from EEStor was recently revealed:
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/uploads/products/2...

If it's good enough for Jay Leno, it's good enough for me.
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/

Seems that the output voltage is too low.. Unless they were to step up the voltage within charging circuits within the eesu infrastructure.. but..

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:06pm #3
Starbuck
EEager
Al_bundy4
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Thu, 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 348

But other EESU chargers that have been recently revealed are also rated at 480 volts (see below).

"New Blink EESU Fast Charger is perfect for high-traffic commercial locations, fleets installations, gas stations, and at locations along major transportation corridors. The Blink DC Fast Charger is classified as a DC (480 volt 3-Phase AC input) charging station. With the Blink DC Fast Charger, EV owners can rest assured they can drive anywhere, without limitations, and charge quickly and conveniently; topping-off as needed, without time constraints..."

http://www.blinknetwork.com/chargers-commercial...

One Size Fits All: A Combo Plug That Can Handle Fast EESU Charging:
http://www.plugincars.com/one-size-fits-all-com...

Walgreens Chooses DC Fast EESU Charging Where It Can:
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/wal...

Restaurants should offer it free, or with a coupon, if $50 is spent in the establishment, the ($1 cost of electricity for the) charge ‘is on us’.

Last edited Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:17pm by Starbuck

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:18pm #4
richardh68
EEager
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 333

I dont know seems like a waste to have every vehicle have extra components to step up the voltage to 3kV or 5kV or 10kV from 480V. I dont know how much that component would cost.. but i would guess atleast a couple hundred dollars.. plus the dealing with the excess heat in a car is even more problematic. which seems very wasteful over several million cars...

Can anyone say definitively I am wrong?

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:23pm #5
Starbuck
EEager
Al_bundy4
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Thu, 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 348

Unlike Li-ion batteries very little heat is generated when charging an EESU supercapacitor (e.g. no chemical reactions, minimal internal resistance, ...).

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:30pm #6
WalksOnDirt
EESUrient
Ctenucha
Registered: Oct, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 21 Mar 2012
Posts: 1749

richardh68 wrote:

I dont know seems like a waste to have every vehicle have extra components to step up the voltage to 3kV or 5kV or 10kV from 480V. I dont know how much that component would cost.. but i would guess atleast a couple hundred dollars.. plus the dealing with the excess heat in a car is even more problematic. which seems very wasteful over several million cars...

Can anyone say definitively I am wrong?

It is necessary if you want to charge them from a standard outlet. On the other hand, Starbuck is just making up the EESU compatible part on these chargers. They may or may not work, depending on the EESU design. There are no EESUs around to check.


Deasil is the right way to go.

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:38pm #7
richardh68
EEager
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 333

you are correct charging a EESU itself involves little heat.. but I would think the stepping up of the voltage would, especially considering the size of the inductor that would be needed(if that is how they are still made) and the parasitic resistance it would induce into the circuit.. I would guess between 5% and 20% of the total energy would be lost as heat in the stepping up of voltage..

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:39pm #8
EEventually
EExhilarating
Ninjaneer
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 13 Dec 2013
Posts: 3696

Charging will have to run through the PEM and rapid. Charging would be a much higher rating so I kind of suspect rapid charging will require special equipment that goes to 4kV. Otherwise the charging will not substantially exceed the max power output for propulsion.


“Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.”- Michael Crichton

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:41pm #9
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

WalksOnDirt wrote:

...Starbuck is just making up the EESU compatible part on these chargers. They may or may not work, depending on the EESU design. There are no EESUs around to check.

I'm with WalksOnDirt. It seems pointless to debate what sort of charger an EESU-powered EV will use, when there aren't any around to experiment with.

I'm not sure why Starbuck has inserted the word "EESU" into several headlines for articles which are about charging li-ion-battery-powered EVs. It looks like he's just trying to get attention.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Tue, 13 Sep 2011, 11:51pm #10
richardh68
EEager
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 333

Skeptikal T. wrote:

WalksOnDirt wrote:

...Starbuck is just making up the EESU compatible part on these chargers. They may or may not work, depending on the EESU design. There are no EESUs around to check.

I'm with WalksOnDirt. It seems pointless to debate what sort of charger an EESU-powered EV will use, when there aren't any around to experiment with.

I'm not sure why Starbuck has inserted the word "EESU" into several headlines for articles which are about charging li-ion-battery-powered EVs. It looks like he's just trying to get attention.


he succeded

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 12:12am #11
EEventually
EExhilarating
Ninjaneer
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 13 Dec 2013
Posts: 3696

Trademark subterfuge more likely.


“Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.”- Michael Crichton

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 12:24am #12
Starbuck
EEager
Al_bundy4
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Thu, 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 348

Standards for EV charging stations have been established and several hundred of these EV charging stations have already been installed nationwide.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/wal...

EESUs will have to be compatible with the national grid of EV charging stations in-order to be commercially successful. Am I missing something? They will have to include the voltage step-up electronics with their EESUs no matter what.

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 12:46am #13
WalksOnDirt
EESUrient
Ctenucha
Registered: Oct, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 21 Mar 2012
Posts: 1749

Starbuck wrote:

Standards for EV charging stations have been established and several hundred of these EV charging stations have already been installed nationwide.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/wal...

EESUs will have to be compatible with the national grid of EV charging stations in-order to be commercially successful. Am I missing something? They will have to include the voltage step-up electronics with their EESUs no matter what.

It doesn't have to accommodate all of them. Probably 120, 240, and 3500DC is enough, but maybe there will be enough demand for something around 450 volts. Assuming EEStor can make anything at all, that is.


Deasil is the right way to go.

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 12:58am #14
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

If we ever do actually see EESU-powered cars, then I expect to see two completely separate charging systems.

There will be a Level 1/Level 2 charger, for people charging at home (or in parking lots, or curbside from EV hitching posts), which will use the car's onboard PEM to regulate charging.

And perhaps not in the first generation, but soon after, EESU-powered cars will also have a separate charge port that connects directly to the EESU, bypassing the PEM, with a large cross-section, low-resistance connection. That will be used at quick-charge stations for commercial, industrial strength quick-charging, using the charge station's extra-heavy-duty PEM or voltage regulator or whatever.

I do expect to eventually see EV charging in 5-6 minutes or perhaps even less, whether or not the EESU becomes a reality. The faster a station can deliver a charge, the more paying customers it will get per hour. Plus, customers will prefer faster charging. So, competition will drive fast-charge stations to offer ever shorter charge times, and competition will also drive EV manufacturers to make cars which can accept shorter charge times.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 8:50am #15
EEventually
EExhilarating
Ninjaneer
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 13 Dec 2013
Posts: 3696

EESU-powered cars will also have a separate charge port that connects directly to the EESU, bypassing the PEM

There's gonna be regulatory and safety issues there. Remember, everything over 600V requires special training and handling due to standards and definitions in NFPA-70, the National Electrical Code. It'll be a while.


“Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.”- Michael Crichton

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 8:59am #16
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

EEventually wrote:

EESU-powered cars will also have a separate charge port that connects directly to the EESU, bypassing the PEM

There's gonna be regulatory and safety issues there. Remember, everything over 600V requires special training and handling due to standards and definitions in NFPA-70, the National Electrical Code. It'll be a while.

Well, of course I could be wrong. But I suspect if there is a lot of demand for a truly fast charge, and the ability to do it reasonably safely, that the regulations will be changed, or a regulation will be added to make an exception.

Regulations are not written in stone.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 9:12am #17
eestorblog
Administrator
Christmas
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 16 Apr 2014
Posts: 4570

Starbuck wrote:

The following 250 KW (480v, 330a) charger for charging EESUs from EEStor was recently revealed:
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/uploads/products/2...

If it's good enough for Jay Leno, it's good enough for me.
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/

I'm not a fan of how you worded this. No charger has been revealed where the makers of that charger call out EEStor specifically.


------------------
www.nyumbani.org

http://theeestory.com/topics/1949

I believe in miracles and UFO's.

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 9:50am #18
farmEEr
EEluminated
Gleaner751
Registered: Aug, 2009
Last visit: Sun, 02 Feb 2014
Posts: 591

eestorblog wrote:

Starbuck wrote:

The following 250 KW (480v, 330a) charger for charging EESUs from EEStor was recently revealed:
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/uploads/products/2...

If it's good enough for Jay Leno, it's good enough for me.
http://evsolutions.avinc.com/

I'm not a fan of how you worded this. No charger has been revealed where the makers of that charger call out EEStor specifically.

The charger is tougher than DW thought, isn't it.


They're not building pet rocks in there.
eesu.farmeer@gmail.com

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 9:51am #19
EEventually
EExhilarating
Ninjaneer
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 13 Dec 2013
Posts: 3696

Regulations are not written in stone.

Regulations based on the physics of electrical hazards are kinda hard to just exclude. What is more likely is special access structures that are more hardened to resist compromise in a collision and then specialized equipment, procedures, and training to use these access structures for fast charging. You will see this implemented for over-the-road freight operators before individual consumers since that's where the economics will demand it. Of course there will be workarounds but that will take time and must be driven, not by simple desire, but hard cold cash.


“Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.”- Michael Crichton

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 1:18pm #20
SupEErtech
EExpert
Registered: Nov, 2009
Last visit: Thu, 05 Apr 2012
Posts: 104

Skeptikal T. wrote:

EEventually wrote:

EESU-powered cars will also have a separate charge port that connects directly to the EESU, bypassing the PEM

There's gonna be regulatory and safety issues there. Remember, everything over 600V requires special training and handling due to standards and definitions in NFPA-70, the National Electrical Code. It'll be a while.

Well, of course I could be wrong. But I suspect if there is a lot of demand for a truly fast charge, and the ability to do it reasonably safely, that the regulations will be changed, or a regulation will be added to make an exception.

Regulations are not written in stone.

the connection safety issues will probably be handled by coming up with a new failsafe connection system (or at least highly idiot resistant). the crash and stray voltage safety issues will be handled internaly to the EESU itself (probably not dificult).


EESTOR believer since 2002

Offline
Wed, 14 Sep 2011, 6:12pm #21
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

SupEErtech wrote:

the connection safety issues will probably be handled by coming up with a new failsafe connection system (or at least highly idiot resistant).

That's what I was thinking, too. A "smart" connection that tests to see if it's seated securely and covered properly before it actually starts sending high-voltage power to the EV.

I think this could ultimately be turned into self-service fast charging, but I would expect such a system to start out using trained human operators.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Thu, 15 Sep 2011, 3:25am #22
Tec
EExhilarating
New_tec
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Sun, 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 8307

Failsafe isn't just a marketing label.

It means that any failure mode of the protective mechanism must result in the equipment reverting to a safe condition.

Any mechanism that tries to detect whether a connector is plugged in and properly seated etc. is clearly itself prone to failure. And this failure could well result in the equipment failing to the powered up situation when it shouldn't.

If you can't achieve this, then you need to provide multiple independent mechanisms so they ALL have to fail simultaneously before the power goes on.

Engineering is so easy when you ignore all the problems isn't it.

Go away and think again a little more deeply as to how you can make it truly safe to use.

Offline
Thu, 15 Sep 2011, 4:26am #23
Bone
EEluminated
Registered: Jul, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 31 Jan 2012
Posts: 605

Tec wrote:

Failsafe isn't just a marketing label.

It means that any failure mode of the protective mechanism must result in the equipment reverting to a safe condition.

Any mechanism that tries to detect whether a connector is plugged in and properly seated etc. is clearly itself prone to failure. And this failure could well result in the equipment failing to the powered up situation when it shouldn't.

If you can't achieve this, then you need to provide multiple independent mechanisms so they ALL have to fail simultaneously before the power goes on.

Engineering is so easy when you ignore all the problems isn't it.

So? Redundant safety systems are used where redundancy is needed. It really isn't particularly difficult engineering task to design safe charging connection.


1 on Lensman scale

Offline
Thu, 15 Sep 2011, 5:21am #24
Tec
EExhilarating
New_tec
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Sun, 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 8307

Bone wrote:

Tec wrote:

Failsafe isn't just a marketing label.

It means that any failure mode of the protective mechanism must result in the equipment reverting to a safe condition.

Any mechanism that tries to detect whether a connector is plugged in and properly seated etc. is clearly itself prone to failure. And this failure could well result in the equipment failing to the powered up situation when it shouldn't.

If you can't achieve this, then you need to provide multiple independent mechanisms so they ALL have to fail simultaneously before the power goes on.

Engineering is so easy when you ignore all the problems isn't it.

So? Redundant safety systems are used where redundancy is needed. It really isn't particularly difficult engineering task to design safe charging connection.

Jolly good!

Good engineering is always obvious once someone has done the clever bit.

One of the nicest fail-safe system is the vacuum brakes used on all trains. Damage to the vacuum system will either cause not cause a leak in which case the braking system is effectively undamaged, or will cause a leak in which case the brakes are applied. Every set of wheels - given a loss of vaucum independently applies the brakes on loss of the vacuum so failure of one brake system will not affect the others.

Dead easy. Except that before Westinghouse came up with it, it didn't exist.

I think ensuring a connector might be more tricky than you think. For a start you might define an acceptable failure rate - say one failure every million chargers every thousand years. I think you WOULD need multiple independent systems to achieve this, but how many would depend on their level of usage, and their individual failure rates.

I think you'd have to be able to defend this with figures. Even so, I'd want regular mandatory safety checks on them, and i think a resposnible government would too.

My point is that 'fail-safe' is a term that is bandied around too often. It doesn't just happen, and it's worth noting that if you are pushed to multiple independent mechanisms as I think you would be, then that isn't - in the formal sense - fail safe so much as merely reducing the probability of a dangerous failure to an acceptably low level.

A little nit-picking perhaps, but I feel the distinction is important enough to make.

Offline
Thu, 15 Sep 2011, 8:24am #25
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

Tec wrote:

Engineering is so easy when you ignore all the problems isn't it.

You're being much too calm, Tec. When discussing the possibility of fast-charging an EV, you should scream, foam at the mouth, chew up the furniture, and beat the porch railing with your cane until something breaks.

Surely you haven't forgotten it's your self-appointed duty to convince everyone that EVs will never be practical and that they're much too dangerous to be used?


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Thu, 15 Sep 2011, 9:12am #26
Bone
EEluminated
Registered: Jul, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 31 Jan 2012
Posts: 605

Tec wrote:

My point is that 'fail-safe' is a term that is bandied around too often. It doesn't just happen, and it's worth noting that if you are pushed to multiple independent mechanisms as I think you would be, then that isn't - in the formal sense - fail safe so much as merely reducing the probability of a dangerous failure to an acceptably low level.

Well, that is valid point. Electrical safety regulations are not even intended to guarantee literally fail-safe systems and equipment. It is always about reducing propability of hazard to acceptable level.

I don't intend to downspeak the amount of work that is required. There is lot of regulative work to set the required level of safety. There is lot of engineering work to design equipment that meets the requirements.

My point is that there is nothing extraordinary in designing safety aspects of high voltage and high power charging systems. Risks are assessed and the necessary protective devices are included in the system to meet any relevant safety regulations. It will add design cost and system cost as it does with any electrical equipment, but there is no unsolvable safety issues involved. Just engineering as usual.


1 on Lensman scale

Offline