Electric Ford Aspire for sale.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
50 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Electric Ford Aspire for sale.

Lawrence Rhodes
http://www.evalbum.com/418 Selling my Ford Aspire electric conversion.  Very
peppy.  About 12k miles on drive train and conversion.  New body after
accident.  Now has 97k miles on the clock. (not the conversion or drive train)
The new body is a 1994 5 door hatch.  Contact Lawrence Rhodes

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Len Moskowitz
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Lee Hart
On 1/3/2013 8:12 AM, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1366&doc_id=256425

Interesting. I wish they had provided more details, though. What's there
is mainly marketing. They did some tests (that they don't explain) that
predicted a long life for the nimh cells. Then they got some field data
that showed the actual life was longer than they predicted.

Then they did some tests to predict the life of the lithium ion cells
(also not explained). But there wasn't any actual life data to confirm
whether or not the predictions will match reality.

This is like saying "I bought light bulbs that claimed 1000 hours life;
they actually lasted 2000 hours. So I bought a *different* kind of light
that claimed 4000 hours life; therefore I conclude that it will last
8000 hours." The conclusion does not follow from the facts presented.

--
First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they fight you; then you
win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
--
Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Jukka Järvinen-3
They cannot be serious in this.

If they undersized the Ni-MH cells to the task they will do the same
with lions.

Lions will last 10 years and longer if treated right. But adding the
cooling etc. extra stuff to the packaging they will need to downsize
cells even more. Eventually having too heavy pack for the task.
Temperature is the thing that kills their cells (spot heat in the
electrodes). Not cycles

I think they should leave these things to people and companies who
actually know something about the batteries. But then they could not
claim all the federal support. :D

-Jukka

2013/1/3 Lee Hart <[hidden email]>:

> On 1/3/2013 8:12 AM, Len Moskowitz wrote:
>>
>> http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1366&doc_id=256425
>
>
> Interesting. I wish they had provided more details, though. What's there is
> mainly marketing. They did some tests (that they don't explain) that
> predicted a long life for the nimh cells. Then they got some field data that
> showed the actual life was longer than they predicted.
>
> Then they did some tests to predict the life of the lithium ion cells (also
> not explained). But there wasn't any actual life data to confirm whether or
> not the predictions will match reality.
>
> This is like saying "I bought light bulbs that claimed 1000 hours life; they
> actually lasted 2000 hours. So I bought a *different* kind of light that
> claimed 4000 hours life; therefore I conclude that it will last 8000 hours."
> The conclusion does not follow from the facts presented.
>
> --
> First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they fight you; then you
> win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
> --
> Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Ruckus
Jukka, you obviously have a strong bias against lithium.  Why?

The testing clearly showed that lithium was superior under severe use.
What's to argue with?

The lab testing is more severe than actual use, exactly as it is designed
to be.

These results are nothing new.  Lithium is widely considered to have a
superior life compared to NiMH.

I believe this is a step forward for EV's.  They initially chose NiMH for
power/size.  But now are realizing longevity is better.  I was afraid
manufacturer's were all going with short-lived batts (NiMH) only to fulfill
the prophecy that batt cars are prone to failure.  To me this shows they
are serious about the technology.

What I find confusing is the variety of batts that fall under the 'lion'
umbrella.  Does this mean lifepo4? Or something else.
On Jan 3, 2013 11:58 AM, "Jukka Järvinen" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> They cannot be serious in this.
>
> If they undersized the Ni-MH cells to the task they will do the same
> with lions.
>
> Lions will last 10 years and longer if treated right. But adding the
> cooling etc. extra stuff to the packaging they will need to downsize
> cells even more. Eventually having too heavy pack for the task.
> Temperature is the thing that kills their cells (spot heat in the
> electrodes). Not cycles
>
> I think they should leave these things to people and companies who
> actually know something about the batteries. But then they could not
> claim all the federal support. :D
>
> -Jukka
>
> 2013/1/3 Lee Hart <[hidden email]>:
> > On 1/3/2013 8:12 AM, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> >>
> >> http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1366&doc_id=256425
> >
> >
> > Interesting. I wish they had provided more details, though. What's there
> is
> > mainly marketing. They did some tests (that they don't explain) that
> > predicted a long life for the nimh cells. Then they got some field data
> that
> > showed the actual life was longer than they predicted.
> >
> > Then they did some tests to predict the life of the lithium ion cells
> (also
> > not explained). But there wasn't any actual life data to confirm whether
> or
> > not the predictions will match reality.
> >
> > This is like saying "I bought light bulbs that claimed 1000 hours life;
> they
> > actually lasted 2000 hours. So I bought a *different* kind of light that
> > claimed 4000 hours life; therefore I conclude that it will last 8000
> hours."
> > The conclusion does not follow from the facts presented.
> >
> > --
> > First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they fight you; then you
> > win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
> > --
> > Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
> > _______________________________________________
> > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
> > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> >
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130103/ee6c9681/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Jukka Järvinen-3
I'm just looking at the data since 1990's.

LiFePO4 has been on roads that 8 years now. We know how they die and
how the live. Most of the batteries at that age are already at their
low 60% of original capacity and internal resistance has gone up
several folds. +10 years is doable.

What we've seen on Priuses and even earlier on say Rav4's and EV-1
tells that Ni-MH is pretty stable set of batteries. If used right.
It's not going to rock due maybe some other reasons (costs, patents,
etc.). When doing comparisons people should know what they are
comparing.

What I'm blabbing here is about the accelerated tests that are just
accelerated tests and they can be very misleading. Due this they end
up making bad cars and we who live from Lion industry suffer from
their bad designs. Soon we read how bad EV's are again and misinfo is
again the real info. Just because big boys said so. Hate it.

Chinese have done good job. Winston in the lead. They did something
extraordinary when bringing the lions to our cars 13 years ago. They
started the revolution and it should be printed in history so.

Ford and such have done their best to keep the brake on. Now they've
changed the tactics.

Sorry for the politics.. It just came out like this.. :P

-Jukka



2013/1/4 Marcus Reddish <[hidden email]>:

> Jukka, you obviously have a strong bias against lithium.  Why?
>
> The testing clearly showed that lithium was superior under severe use.
> What's to argue with?
>
> The lab testing is more severe than actual use, exactly as it is designed
> to be.
>
> These results are nothing new.  Lithium is widely considered to have a
> superior life compared to NiMH.
>
> I believe this is a step forward for EV's.  They initially chose NiMH for
> power/size.  But now are realizing longevity is better.  I was afraid
> manufacturer's were all going with short-lived batts (NiMH) only to fulfill
> the prophecy that batt cars are prone to failure.  To me this shows they
> are serious about the technology.
>
> What I find confusing is the variety of batts that fall under the 'lion'
> umbrella.  Does this mean lifepo4? Or something else.
> On Jan 3, 2013 11:58 AM, "Jukka Järvinen" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> They cannot be serious in this.
>>
>> If they undersized the Ni-MH cells to the task they will do the same
>> with lions.
>>
>> Lions will last 10 years and longer if treated right. But adding the
>> cooling etc. extra stuff to the packaging they will need to downsize
>> cells even more. Eventually having too heavy pack for the task.
>> Temperature is the thing that kills their cells (spot heat in the
>> electrodes). Not cycles
>>
>> I think they should leave these things to people and companies who
>> actually know something about the batteries. But then they could not
>> claim all the federal support. :D
>>
>> -Jukka
>>
>> 2013/1/3 Lee Hart <[hidden email]>:
>> > On 1/3/2013 8:12 AM, Len Moskowitz wrote:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1366&doc_id=256425
>> >
>> >
>> > Interesting. I wish they had provided more details, though. What's there
>> is
>> > mainly marketing. They did some tests (that they don't explain) that
>> > predicted a long life for the nimh cells. Then they got some field data
>> that
>> > showed the actual life was longer than they predicted.
>> >
>> > Then they did some tests to predict the life of the lithium ion cells
>> (also
>> > not explained). But there wasn't any actual life data to confirm whether
>> or
>> > not the predictions will match reality.
>> >
>> > This is like saying "I bought light bulbs that claimed 1000 hours life;
>> they
>> > actually lasted 2000 hours. So I bought a *different* kind of light that
>> > claimed 4000 hours life; therefore I conclude that it will last 8000
>> hours."
>> > The conclusion does not follow from the facts presented.
>> >
>> > --
>> > First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they fight you; then you
>> > win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
>> > --
>> > Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
>> > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130103/ee6c9681/attachment.htm>
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Cor van de Water
In reply to this post by Ruckus
Marcus,
Why would Jukka be biased against Lithium if he has helped set up Lithium production facilities and is looking into other aspects, such as recycling it? In fact, with this move from Ford, he would have much more Li to recycle, so beneficial for him. But he also knows what works and what not for Lithium, so it is worthwhile to try to understand why he has reservations for this application of Li instead of NiMH.

Regards,

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [hidden email] Private: http://www.cvandewater.info
Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Reddish
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 4:33 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Jukka, you obviously have a strong bias against lithium.  Why?

The testing clearly showed that lithium was superior under severe use.
What's to argue with?

The lab testing is more severe than actual use, exactly as it is designed
to be.

These results are nothing new.  Lithium is widely considered to have a
superior life compared to NiMH.

I believe this is a step forward for EV's.  They initially chose NiMH for
power/size.  But now are realizing longevity is better.  I was afraid
manufacturer's were all going with short-lived batts (NiMH) only to fulfill
the prophecy that batt cars are prone to failure.  To me this shows they
are serious about the technology.

What I find confusing is the variety of batts that fall under the 'lion'
umbrella.  Does this mean lifepo4? Or something else.
On Jan 3, 2013 11:58 AM, "Jukka Järvinen" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> They cannot be serious in this.
>
> If they undersized the Ni-MH cells to the task they will do the same
> with lions.
>
> Lions will last 10 years and longer if treated right. But adding the
> cooling etc. extra stuff to the packaging they will need to downsize
> cells even more. Eventually having too heavy pack for the task.
> Temperature is the thing that kills their cells (spot heat in the
> electrodes). Not cycles
>
> I think they should leave these things to people and companies who
> actually know something about the batteries. But then they could not
> claim all the federal support. :D
>
> -Jukka
>
> 2013/1/3 Lee Hart <[hidden email]>:
> > On 1/3/2013 8:12 AM, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> >>
> >> http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1366&doc_id=256425
> >
> >
> > Interesting. I wish they had provided more details, though. What's there
> is
> > mainly marketing. They did some tests (that they don't explain) that
> > predicted a long life for the nimh cells. Then they got some field data
> that
> > showed the actual life was longer than they predicted.
> >
> > Then they did some tests to predict the life of the lithium ion cells
> (also
> > not explained). But there wasn't any actual life data to confirm whether
> or
> > not the predictions will match reality.
> >
> > This is like saying "I bought light bulbs that claimed 1000 hours life;
> they
> > actually lasted 2000 hours. So I bought a *different* kind of light that
> > claimed 4000 hours life; therefore I conclude that it will last 8000
> hours."
> > The conclusion does not follow from the facts presented.
> >
> > --
> > First they ignore you; then they mock you; then they fight you; then you
> > win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
> > --
> > Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
> > _______________________________________________
> > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
> > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> >
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130103/ee6c9681/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Lee Hart
In reply to this post by Ruckus
On 1/3/2013 6:32 PM, Marcus Reddish wrote:
> Jukka, you obviously have a strong bias against lithium.  Why?

Actually, I'd say Jukka is a strong proponent of lithium. He has
considerable experience with them... perhaps more than the Ford hacks
that wrote this PR piece!

> The testing clearly showed that lithium was superior under severe use.

They did not describe their test method at all. No hint at all of the
voltage limits, charge/discharge current, temperature, depth of
discharge, number of cycles, etc.

> The lab testing is more severe than actual use, exactly as it is designed
> to be.

But we don't actually know that, do we?

> These results are nothing new.  Lithium is widely considered to have a
> superior life compared to NiMH.

Lithium is widely *marketed* as having superior life. But the actual
field data has not supported this.

There is considerable field evidence that nimh cells have survived for
over 10 years and over 100,000 miles and are still going strong. But,
where are the field results for EVs or hybrids with lithium cells that
lasted that long?

On the other hand, there are millions of examples of products with
lithium batteries that have failed within a few years, and with only a
few hundred cycles. That is not encouraging.

> I believe this is a step forward for EV's.  They initially chose NiMH for
> What I find confusing is the variety of batts that fall under the 'lion'
> umbrella.  Does this mean lifepo4? Or something else.

This Ford press release was completely mute on what type of battery. All
it said was "lithium ion".

--
If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people to collect wood
and don't assign them tasks and work. Rather, teach them to long
for the endless immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
--
Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

EVDL Administrator
On 3 Jan 2013 at 20:04, Lee Hart wrote:

> There is considerable field evidence that nimh cells have survived for over
> 10 years and over 100,000 miles and are still going strong.

These would probably be the Panasonic NiMH batteries used in the early
Toyota RAV4-EV, offered for sale only in California.

This is no surprise.  NiMH is a close relative of NiFe, which may be the
longest-lived battery of all.  I've read that some nickel-iron batteries
made early in the 20th century - in the range of 100 years old - are still
in service!

Although NiMH doesn't have the specific energy of lithium, it's otherwise an
outstanding EV battery.  It has decent SE, outstanding longevity, and a good
safety record.  IMO, it's a crime (or should be) that NiMH usage in BEVs is
severely limited by restrictions placed on it by ... you guessed it, a
petroleum company.

David Roden
EVDL Administrator
http://www.evdl.org/


_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

tomw
In reply to this post by Lee Hart
Lee, This: "Lithium is widely *marketed* as having superior life. But the actual
field data has not supported this."

is a different statement than this: "There is considerable field evidence that nimh cells have survived for over 10 years and over 100,000 miles and are still going strong. But, where are the field results for EVs or hybrids with lithium cells that lasted that long?"

The first infers there is actual data that shows Lithium-based batteries do not have superior life.  The second indicates there is no data evidencing long life of Li-based batteries.  Then as your counter "evidence" of long life you offer the example of poor lifetime "smaller cells" (maybe like Li-Cobalt laptop batteries, many of which are always kept at full charge of 4.2V, which is well-known to shorten lifetime?), not an example of LiFePO4 used in a ev.  

Of course you couldn't provide the latter because as you say their isn't any, simply because no one has been using them that long.  It will still be many years before we have a statistically meaningful sample of lifetime data for LiFePO4 in ev applications.  And that data will have to be carefully analyzed because of the wide variation in usage, with some users regularly discharging at 5C or more, using them in very cold winter temperatures with no heating, regularly discharging to 20% SoC, regularly driving hard in 110 F summer ambient...so we would expect to see wide variation in lifetime according to usage just as we do with lead acid. I've had some swear lead acid don't last longer than a year for ev applications, and Roland talk about getting 8 years or more.  They are both correct of course, for the batteries they used, under the conditions they used them.  The same will apply to LiFePO4.

There are more than 18 Li-based battery formulations, all with different properties. There is a lithium-based formulation that has about the same specific energy in finished product as NiMH, lithium titanate, other formulations are generally higher.  The higher specific energy formulations such as lithium cobalt are known to be less stable than LiFePO4, but they are used by some nonetheless due to their significantly higher specific energy. Statements starting with "lithium batteries" are not very meaningful as a result.

I don't think there will be widespread used of ev's (not PHEV's) in the U.S. until the cost of ev's drops considerably and range increases considerably.  We won't do that with NiMH's specific energy of around 70Wh/kg - nor with LiFePO4 for that matter.  Sure the ev1 had good range with NiMH, but you wouldn't get most in the U.S. to purchase one if they were available.


 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Lee Hart
tomw wrote:

> Lee, *This:* "Lithium is widely *marketed* as having superior life. But the
> actual field data has not supported this."
>
> *is a different statement than this:* "There is considerable field evidence
> that nimh cells have survived for over 10 years and over 100,000 miles and
> are still going strong. But, where are the field results for EVs or hybrids
> with lithium cells that lasted that long?"
>
> The first infers there is actual data that shows Lithium-based batteries do
> not have superior life.  The second indicates there is no data evidencing
> long life of Li-based batteries.  Then as your counter "evidence" of long
> life you offer the example of poor lifetime "smaller cells" (maybe like
> Li-Cobalt laptop batteries, many of which are always kept at full charge of
> 4.2V, which is well-known to shorten lifetime?), not an example of LiFePO4
> used in a ev.
>
> Of course you couldn't provide the latter because as you say their isn't
> any, simply because no one has been using them that long.

I'm not an industry insider; I don't have access to any internal test
data that the auto companies or anyone else are using to decide these
issues.

But as a consumer and battery user, what I *do* see tells me that:

  - We have lots of examples of EVs with nimh cells that have gone well
    over 100k miles and lasted over 10 years. I myself have examples of
    GM Ovonic EV1 batteries over 10 years old that still work. And my
    2001 Toyota Prius has over 138k miles and 12 years on its nimh cells.

  - I don't know of any lithium cells, of any chemistry that have
    demonstrated anything even close to this much life in real world
    applications. I have 100+ lithium cells myself, of various
    chemistries, in a dozen or more devices. None of them have
    demonstrated the kind of life claimed by those who market lithium
    cells. I see more like 3 years and maybe a thousand cycles of life.

> It will still be many years before we have a statistically meaningful
> sample of lifetime data for LiFePO4 in ev applications.

Possibly. Nissan used lithium ion cells in their "compliance car"
EV-Plus back in the late 1990's. I don't know if any data was published
on how they held up.

Tesla is using laptop batteries in their EVs. Aside from some
sensationalized news stories, I haven't seen any serious data on how
well they are holding up.

A123 has been selling LiFePO4 cells for several years now. They have
been used in some impressive EVs (Bill Dube's Killacycle comes to mind),
and they look very promising. I have some myself that are approaching 3
years old. But I have also tested Thunderskys that were terrible, and
CALB cells that were disappointing (well below specs). I recently
measured some GNB cells that also had some issues.

> And that data will have to be carefully analyzed because of the
> wide variation in usage...

Yes; you are right! It's vital to know HOW they are used. It's been said
that most batteries don't die of old age -- they are *murdered*! They
get mis-applied by designers, and mis-used by customers, and so fail early.

What I'd like to see is an impartial test. Build some EVs with hybrid
battery packs, made of two or more different types of batteries. Include
a BMS that tracks how each type performs, and prevents obvious abuse.
Then we could gather real-world data on how they perform, without all
the marketing "spin" of the battery salesmen.

This is something the auto companies are (or should be) doing... but if
so, they keep their data secret to gain a "competitive advantage" on
their rivals. But this kind of battery testing is also something that
hobbyists could do, if they were willing to get organized and be
objective (not "my battery beat your battery" anti-cooperation).

> I don't think there will be widespread used of ev's (not PHEV's) in the U.S.
> until the cost of ev's drops considerably and range increases considerably.

Maybe... We still sell millions of bicycles, despite them being slow and
short range. Electric bicycles are a wonderful form of EV that has a
tremendous potential.

And has been demonstrated over and over again, the average person drives
such a short distance per day that relatively low-tech inexpensive EVs
can already satisfy millions of people's daily driving.

I think the big issues holding back EVs are not technical. They are:

  - Unfamiliarity. People don't know about them, and are fearful
    of the unknown.
  - Higher cost, due to low production volumes.
  - Lack of commercial EVs. The few that exist are very expensive,
    and only marketed in limited areas.

Range simply isn't an issue for most people. They may *think* it is, due
to the heavy emphasis it gets from the media pundits. But when people
actually *have* an EV, they generally find range isn't really a problem.

--
*BE* the change that you wish to see in the world. -- Mahatma Gandhi
--
Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Cor van de Water
In reply to this post by Lee Hart
FWIW:
There are also examples of mis-applied NiMH cells that consequently have
a short and unhappy life, look for example at the Vectrix motorbike that
has a pack of 102 large format 30Ah cells (GoldPeak, see EVB website at
http://www.evbtech.com/nimh-modules ) but where the ventilation is
insufficient, the charging algorithm too aggressive and apparently
marketing pushed the abuse of the cells from going from almost 2x over
spec into further abuse by going almost 3 times over the max discharge
rate(!).
No wonder then that they continue to lose cells at regular intervals and
esp when it is hot already. It is hard to find a Vectrix with more than
about 5k miles on its last pack, especially if it had the software
upgrade to push the max speed from 62 to 68 MPH and increase the abuse.
Only people with moderate (EV) driving style, moderate temperatures and
nightly (timed) recharge, see long pack life. Several Vectrix have been
converted to Lithium Ion. There has even been a Vectrix enthusiast who
reverse-engineered the charger software, in order to implement a less
aggressive charging profile as well as allowing the owner to select a
cool-down period after driving before the charger would start to pump
more heat into the already hot pack... Many owners have discarded
warranty by loading this rogue software in order te preserve their
deteriorating pack. (Warranty was shaky anyway due to Vectrix
organisation issues, I suggest you google it if interested)

The whole reason is exactly what Jukka warned for: if you do not give
your cells a comfortable life, then do not expect long life from them.
That is independent from the chemistry, even though some chemistries are
more forgiving than others.
I have seen examples of short life for both NiMH as well as LiIon. I
have also seen long life on both. Not in the same application obviously.
So, if you want to know if an application (vehicle) will have a long
pack life then you need to step out of the test lab if they cannot
reproduce how the cells are used in practice and you need to find out
how the application is really treating the cells; how graceful or not a
deterioration is handled and if nothing, then time will tell you how the
cells are doing in *that particular* application and ambient conditions.
If engineers make the wrong choice or the ambient is different from what
they expect then the results are different, as owners of Leafs in AZ and
NV have found out.

Jukka's warning for Ford not knowing about battery application and
botching the expected lifetime, independent from which chemistry their
pack is made, still stands.

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [hidden email] Private: http://www.cvandewater.info
Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 6:05 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

On 1/3/2013 6:32 PM, Marcus Reddish wrote:
> Jukka, you obviously have a strong bias against lithium.  Why?

Actually, I'd say Jukka is a strong proponent of lithium. He has
considerable experience with them... perhaps more than the Ford hacks
that wrote this PR piece!

> The testing clearly showed that lithium was superior under severe use.

They did not describe their test method at all. No hint at all of the
voltage limits, charge/discharge current, temperature, depth of
discharge, number of cycles, etc.

> The lab testing is more severe than actual use, exactly as it is
designed
> to be.

But we don't actually know that, do we?

> These results are nothing new.  Lithium is widely considered to have a
> superior life compared to NiMH.

Lithium is widely *marketed* as having superior life. But the actual
field data has not supported this.

There is considerable field evidence that nimh cells have survived for
over 10 years and over 100,000 miles and are still going strong. But,
where are the field results for EVs or hybrids with lithium cells that
lasted that long?

On the other hand, there are millions of examples of products with
lithium batteries that have failed within a few years, and with only a
few hundred cycles. That is not encouraging.

> I believe this is a step forward for EV's.  They initially chose NiMH
for
> What I find confusing is the variety of batts that fall under the
'lion'
> umbrella.  Does this mean lifepo4? Or something else.

This Ford press release was completely mute on what type of battery. All

it said was "lithium ion".

--
If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people to collect wood
and don't assign them tasks and work. Rather, teach them to long
for the endless immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
--
Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

tomw
In reply to this post by Lee Hart
"Range simply isn't an issue for most people. They may *think* it is, due to the heavy emphasis it gets from the media pundits. But when people actually *have* an EV, they generally find range isn't really a problem."

That is a very biased sample.  Those are people who knew the ev had limited range and for various reasons decided they could live with that, BEFORE they made the purchase.  We are all examples.  

As they say, perception is reality (to that person).  You can tell those who demand longer range, but don't really require it (e.g. because they have two cars and one could be an ev used locally), that they don't need it all you want, but you likely won't convince them.

I agree that discomfort with "new things" because they are not familiar is a significant obstacle.  One that will only slowly be overcome through familiarity as they see more and more ev's on the road operating without problems each day, and ride in their friend's ev.

I think it will be a long time before we have agreement on some "expected" lifetime of LiFePO4, and other formulations for ev applications.  You can still witness disagreements on an expected lifetime of lead acid despite having decades of data on their use in ev's for the reasons you, Cor, and I cited.

I wouldn't put a lot of credence in tests of LiFePO4 cells more than 6 - 7 years ago since it is known that there were quality issues then due to trace impurities in the lithium carbonate starting material.

When quick chargers become more widely used it will throw another variable into the mix.  How much will regular quick charging, at say 2C (so you can charge in about 30 minutes), effect lifetime?  Particularly after a vehicle has been driven hard in hot weather.  I expect the debate and news stories of premature battery failures will continue for some time.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Cor van de Water
tomw wrote:
> When quick chargers become more widely used it will throw
> another variable into the mix.  How much will regular quick
> charging, at say 2C (so you can charge in about 30 minutes),
> effect lifetime?  Particularly after a vehicle has been driven
> hard in hot weather.  I expect the debate and news stories of
> premature battery failures will continue for some time.

It is possible to design the charging *system* so it can safely charge
in any circumstance. Consequence may be that it is not fully charging a
pack in 30 mins but takes more time under harsh conditions or deploys
additional technology, such as active cooling the pack, the same reason
that the EV1 was running its AirCo when it had a NiMH pack that was
being charged.

The difficulty is of course to find out what is acceptable and what not
and stay within the limits that keep the cells happy so it results in
long life.

BTW, I deliberately say a charging *system* in contrast to the device
that is generally called a charger, because it must include everything
that affects the way the cells are being recharged, so including BMS,
temperature sensors, pack cooling solution(s), user entry of expect
recharge time and distance to arrival and so on. No point to force the
driver to wait 1/2 hour for a full fast charge if he only needs to go 3
more miles and wants to leave within 2 minutes, because he can recharge
at his destination. That is not different than with liquid fuel - you
can fill up for a few bucks or you can wait till the pump clicks off and
anything in between.
The user interaction is important though - if the user wants to leave
quickly but the pack needs to be cooled first before charging can start
at a safe temperature level, then it is important to give feedback to
the user and possibly even give him the ability to override the
cool-down period, knowing that it will cost him capacity, if he cannot
afford to wait.

Design is all about trade-offs...

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: [hidden email] Private: http://www.cvandewater.info
Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Hoegberg .
In reply to this post by EVDL Administrator



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

> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 21:34:43 -0500
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids
>
> On 3 Jan 2013 at 20:04, Lee Hart wrote:
>
> > There is considerable field evidence that nimh cells have survived for over
> > 10 years and over 100,000 miles and are still going strong.
>
> These would probably be the Panasonic NiMH batteries used in the early
> Toyota RAV4-EV, offered for sale only in California.


-I am 99.975% sure it was sold here in Sweden also, by the local company Ericsson.
Maybe the division was Ericsson Components.


>
> This is no surprise. NiMH is a close relative of NiFe, which may be the
> longest-lived battery of all. I've read that some nickel-iron batteries
> made early in the 20th century - in the range of 100 years old - are still
> in service!

Yes,for example the NiFe company in Sweden(today SAFT-NiFe) have a long history,
but I think cells was made early by others, maybe Edison,



>
> Although NiMH doesn't have the specific energy of lithium, it's otherwise an
> outstanding EV battery. It has decent SE, outstanding longevity, and a good
> safety record.

Mmm, but it seems to have very high losses,
even in EV-95 NiMH cells. Am I wrong?

So maybe not the first choice for the future, due to this.
And also the metal-supply would be a big problem?
I am not sure if it would be possible to scale up NiMH enough in prodution
volumes for a lot of pure EV/plugins, many millions of EV:s each Year.



> IMO, it's a crime (or should be) that NiMH usage in BEVs is
> severely limited by restrictions placed on it by ... you guessed it, a
> petroleum company.

-Well, dont blame them, as they "must" do the "right" thing for its owners? ..I guess..

Many hate this, as we lost maybe 10-15 years or so, but in one way it might be good?
as a lot of other interesting cells now finally pops up.  :-/
(But I also think this patent will run out soon)



-Do we have anyone at the list from USA or Japan, who was in Sweden 1994/1995?
It was an EV-Race here, from Gothanburg in Sweden  to Oslo in Norway.
Many teams competing in the challenge and display of the best electrics.
 For example Ford had a team, maybe 2 cars, and they used
the Swedish Rally Pro Stig Blomquist as driver for this event.  :-)

Toyota also had its EV-team here, maybe this was one of the
very first(??) race/displays for the RAV-4 Electric!
It must have been the EV-95 NiMh-cells in that one..?
(Driver was the Swedish Rally pro Thomas Rådström, Toyota-racing)


Also in the race,the Norwegian Pivco.
(Later Ford bought it and rename it to "Th!ink" )
Im almost sure that they did use STM100 -5 cell from SAFT-NiFe in the cars.
water-cooled NiCd 6V 100Ah
That type of "cell"-blocks are still running here! For example in
the most of our old Renault Clio electric cars.
Sometimes the old ones can have small separator problems..and a cell/block might go **BANG**.

http://www.saftbatteries.com/Produit_STM___High_energy_module_for_traction_293_44/Language/en-US/Default.aspx

Also on display this week was Electric Fuel from Israel(?) if I remember
correct it was about 300Wh/kg Zink Air EV-battery. (mecanical "recharge")

Many other competed, for example, as I remember this:
 One experimental EV from USA, I am almost 100% sure that some university was involved in this.
I think It did have Ovonic cells and a nice AC drive, probably well over 100kW.
Full speed in the hill climb :-)
Sadly I did not have time to talk to them in Gothenburg.
They did not win the race for some reason, but I dont know why, maybe a crash in Norway?

-Maybe some one at EVDL knows more about this interesting car and the team???



/John


     
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Bill Dube
In reply to this post by Lee Hart
A123Systems LiFePO4 cells have shown this cycle life.
http://info.a123systems.com/blog/bid/151833/Cycle-Life-Testing-The-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Ultramarathon

These cells were cycled 100% discharge for five years. (Not 80% like
the typical cell, _100%_ of capacity.)  After 20,000 cycles, and five
years, they still have 65% of their original capacity.

When you put these cells in a 100 mile range BEV pack, it works out
to 1,650,000 miles. No joke.

Bill D.

At 01:23 PM 1/4/2013, Lee Hart wrote:


>  - I don't know of any lithium cells, of any chemistry that have
>    demonstrated anything even close to this much life in real world
>    applications. I have 100+ lithium cells myself, of various
>    chemistries, in a dozen or more devices. None of them have
>    demonstrated the kind of life claimed by those who market lithium
>    cells. I see more like 3 years and maybe a thousand cycles of life.
>
>>It will still be many years before we have a statistically meaningful
>>sample of lifetime data for LiFePO4 in ev applications.

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Lee Hart
In reply to this post by Hoegberg .
Lee Hart wrote:
>>> There is considerable field evidence that nimh cells have survived for over
>>> 10 years and over 100,000 miles and are still going strong.

>> These would probably be the Panasonic NiMH batteries used in the early
>> Toyota RAV4-EV, offered for sale only in California.

Hoegberg wrote:
 > I am 99.975% sure it was sold here in Sweden also, by the local
 > company Ericsson. Maybe the division was Ericsson Components.

Also the GM/Ovonic nimh cells used in the EV1 and S10-EV. The EV1 "field
tests" were cut short when they crushed them, but the S10's survived and
are still in use.

There have also been examples from other manufacturers. Saft and Varta
both had EVs on the road for extended periods with their nimh cells.

>> NiMH is a close relative of NiFe, which may be the longest-lived
>> battery of all.

> Yes, for example the NiFe company in Sweden (today SAFT-NiFe) have
> a long history, but I think cells was made early by others, maybe
>Edison

Tom Edison made his NiFe cells until about 1921 when the factory burned
down.

>> Although NiMH doesn't have the specific energy of lithium, it's otherwise an
>> outstanding EV battery. It has decent SE, outstanding longevity, and a good
>> safety record.

> Mmm, but it seems to have very high losses,
> even in EV-95 NiMH cells. Am I wrong?

The original NiFe cell is flooded. When it gets above 80% SOC, it begins
heating and gassing. As you charge higher, the charging energy lost to
gassing gets higher, until it is essentially 100% at 100% SOC.

With Edison cells, you just replace the lost water, and let the cells
cool off. No harm is done, though you have to accept the energy loss.
The self-discharge rate is also high, and it decays from 100% to 80% SOC
fairly quickly.

The breakthrough in the NiMH cell was to seal the Edison cell, and trap
the hydrogen gas under pressure. The iron plate was replaced with a
spongy iron alloy. Hydrogen likes to adsorb into spongy metal surfaces;
this kept the internal pressures from getting all that high. The odd
iron alloy also provides a catalyst, to recombine the hydrogen and
oxygen back into water so no water is lost.

> And also the metal-supply would be a big problem?

Probably not. Nickel is expensive, but there is a lot of it. Stainless
steel is the major user. The nickel in nife and nimh cells is easily
recycleable, so you'd get it all back at end of life. In a sane world,
nickel is even more desirable to recycle than lead, as it is more
valuable (and we already recycle 97% or so of our lead).

>> IMO, it's a crime (or should be) that NiMH usage in BEVs is
>> severely limited by restrictions placed on it by... you guessed
>> it, a petroleum company.

Specifically, by Chevron.

> Well, don't blame them, as they "must" do the "right" thing for its
> owners?

Our laws are set up to encourage corporations to maximize profits, *no
matter what* that does to society as a whole. Corporations were created
by laws; they can be regulated or even eliminated by laws, if we had the
political willpower!

> Many hate this, as we lost maybe 10-15 years or so, but in one way it might be good?
> as a lot of other interesting cells now finally pops up.  :-/
> (But I also think this patent will run out soon)

Chevron has a monopoly on nimh cells, and the Chinese effectively have a
monopoly on lithium cells. I'm not sure either of these are in the
public good. :-(

> ... water-cooled NiCd 6V 100Ah. That type of "cell"-blocks are still
> running here! For example in the most of our old Renault Clio electric
> cars.

Nicad is another viable battery technology. There are billions of them
in service. Properly made with high quality construction, they too can
have a very long life. The main issue has been the risk of environmental
problems with the cadmium. As usual, society's response to the problem
has been to ban it completely (like mercury, asbestos, or PCBs), rather
than putting in place good practices for its handling and recycling (as
has been done with lead, and many other toxic but useful materials).

--
Humanity is acquiring all the right technology for all the wrong
reasons. -- R. Buckminster Fuller
--
Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Lee Hart
In reply to this post by Bill Dube
On 1/7/2013 2:10 PM, Bill Dube wrote:
> A123Systems LiFePO4 cells have shown this cycle life.
> http://info.a123systems.com/blog/bid/151833/Cycle-Life-Testing-The-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Ultramarathon
> These cells were cycled 100% discharge for five years... After 20,000 cycles
> and five years, they still have 65% of their original capacity.

I like A123 cells; they are the best lithiums I've ever tested. The
results of this life test are impressive. But there are a couple problems:

1. They only tested two cells. That's a mighty small sample size.
    Carefully hand-picked cells, or just dumb luck could be a big
    factor here.

2. It was only a 5 year test. That's only slightly longer than the
    3 years or so that we generally see for lithium cells in various
    consumer products.

3. They had the advantage of carefully controlled lab conditions:
    Temperature, charge, and discharge currents and voltages were
    all carefully controlled. This is rarely the case in real world
    applications, so real-world life is likely to be less.

We don't know if the cell's loss of capacity (65% at the end of the
test) was a result of the cycles, or time. Do you know of any life tests
they've done with 1 or 2 cycles per day, which is more typical of what
they would see in EV service?

Also, what is the effect of higher charge and discharge currents? A 1C
rate is pretty low for an EV. A123 cells are clearly capable of high
discharge rates, but I don't know what effect that has on life.

--
Ingenuity gets you through times of no money better than money
will get you through times of no ingenuity. -- Terry Pratchett
--
Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Bill Dube
Unlikely hand picked cells. The company is (at least was) not like that.

My suspicion is that they happened to cycle these two cells for five
years. That's it.

The end result was likely a result of cycles and time. The cycle life
works like 5% loss for the first 1000 cycles, and decreasing loss
thereafter (4.5%, 4.3% .....). The calendar life is a function of
temperature, primarily, and goes similarly at 2% for the first year,
with each subsequent year a bit less.

It really doesn't matter, however. You aren't going to  drive your EV
1.6 million miles, are you? I would think that 1/10 this performance
would be just fine. Load them up. Run higher temps. Go crazy and you
still would have them outlast the vehicle.

Bill D.


At 02:14 PM 1/7/2013, Lee Hart wrote:

>On 1/7/2013 2:10 PM, Bill Dube wrote:
>>A123Systems LiFePO4 cells have shown this cycle life.
>>http://info.a123systems.com/blog/bid/151833/Cycle-Life-Testing-The-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Ultramarathon
>>These cells were cycled 100% discharge for five years... After 20,000 cycles
>>and five years, they still have 65% of their original capacity.
>
>I like A123 cells; they are the best lithiums I've ever tested. The
>results of this life test are impressive. But there are a couple problems:
>
>1. They only tested two cells. That's a mighty small sample size.
>    Carefully hand-picked cells, or just dumb luck could be a big
>    factor here.
>
>2. It was only a 5 year test. That's only slightly longer than the
>    3 years or so that we generally see for lithium cells in various
>    consumer products.
>
>3. They had the advantage of carefully controlled lab conditions:
>    Temperature, charge, and discharge currents and voltages were
>    all carefully controlled. This is rarely the case in real world
>    applications, so real-world life is likely to be less.
>
>We don't know if the cell's loss of capacity (65% at the end of the
>test) was a result of the cycles, or time. Do you know of any life
>tests they've done with 1 or 2 cycles per day, which is more typical
>of what they would see in EV service?
>
>Also, what is the effect of higher charge and discharge currents? A
>1C rate is pretty low for an EV. A123 cells are clearly capable of
>high discharge rates, but I don't know what effect that has on life.
>
>--
>Ingenuity gets you through times of no money better than money
>will get you through times of no ingenuity. -- Terry Pratchett
>--
>Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
>_______________________________________________
>UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why Ford Chose Lithium-Ion for 2013 Hybrids

Ruckus
250,000 miles is about 3,000 cycles at 80 miles each (100 mile pack at 80%
discharge).  This seems to be a reasonable expectation.

The Jaguar's 260ah Thunderskys were stored at 100V about 3 months ago with
the bms modules constantly draining power for their LED bulbs.  The voltage
has now fallen all the way down to... 100V.  Another 3-4 months left in the
test...

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Bill Dube <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Unlikely hand picked cells. The company is (at least was) not like that.
>
> My suspicion is that they happened to cycle these two cells for five
> years. That's it.
>
> The end result was likely a result of cycles and time. The cycle life
> works like 5% loss for the first 1000 cycles, and decreasing loss
> thereafter (4.5%, 4.3% .....). The calendar life is a function of
> temperature, primarily, and goes similarly at 2% for the first year, with
> each subsequent year a bit less.
>
> It really doesn't matter, however. You aren't going to  drive your EV 1.6
> million miles, are you? I would think that 1/10 this performance would be
> just fine. Load them up. Run higher temps. Go crazy and you still would
> have them outlast the vehicle.
>
> Bill D.
>
>
>
> At 02:14 PM 1/7/2013, Lee Hart wrote:
>
>> On 1/7/2013 2:10 PM, Bill Dube wrote:
>>
>>> A123Systems LiFePO4 cells have shown this cycle life.
>>> http://info.a123systems.com/**blog/bid/151833/Cycle-Life-**
>>> Testing-The-Lithium-Ion-**Battery-Ultramarathon<http://info.a123systems.com/blog/bid/151833/Cycle-Life-Testing-The-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Ultramarathon>
>>> These cells were cycled 100% discharge for five years... After 20,000
>>> cycles
>>> and five years, they still have 65% of their original capacity.
>>>
>>
>> I like A123 cells; they are the best lithiums I've ever tested. The
>> results of this life test are impressive. But there are a couple problems:
>>
>> 1. They only tested two cells. That's a mighty small sample size.
>>    Carefully hand-picked cells, or just dumb luck could be a big
>>    factor here.
>>
>> 2. It was only a 5 year test. That's only slightly longer than the
>>    3 years or so that we generally see for lithium cells in various
>>    consumer products.
>>
>> 3. They had the advantage of carefully controlled lab conditions:
>>    Temperature, charge, and discharge currents and voltages were
>>    all carefully controlled. This is rarely the case in real world
>>    applications, so real-world life is likely to be less.
>>
>> We don't know if the cell's loss of capacity (65% at the end of the test)
>> was a result of the cycles, or time. Do you know of any life tests they've
>> done with 1 or 2 cycles per day, which is more typical of what they would
>> see in EV service?
>>
>> Also, what is the effect of higher charge and discharge currents? A 1C
>> rate is pretty low for an EV. A123 cells are clearly capable of high
>> discharge rates, but I don't know what effect that has on life.
>>
>> --
>> Ingenuity gets you through times of no money better than money
>> will get you through times of no ingenuity. -- Terry Pratchett
>> --
>> Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/**LeesEVs.htm<http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/**index.html#usub<http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub>
>> http://lists.evdl.org/**listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org<http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org>
>> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/
>> **group/NEDRA <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA>)
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/**index.html#usub<http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub>
> http://lists.evdl.org/**listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org<http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org>
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/*
> *group/NEDRA <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA>)
>
>


--
Marcus Reddish

*North Valley Systems LLC*
Stevensville, Montana
406-360-8628
northvalleyev.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130107/944384ad/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

123