Wait that isn't an F20c
03-18-2013, 05:39 PM
#292
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juan, I just wanted to step in to tell you that the people who said that you will not get 700 horsepower from your dual Warp 11 setups are blatantly wrong. I have seen in real life a Warp 9 pushing 200 horsepower, STOCK. A single Warp 11 would easily push 350 horsepower, STOCK, with ease. The horsepower curves that are published for Warp motors are the 24/7 rating in a temperature environment of 40C ambient with the motor running for 20 years at that full horsepower rating. Besides, a little bit of Calculus math would tell you that the time spent in the 1/4 mile that the motors will be producing 700 horsepower will come no where near causing the motors to heat up to dangerous levels. We are talking sub 12 seconds of max power here, not hours or minutes for the 1/4 mile stretch. Not to mention that all Warp motors have their copper windings insulated with class H insulation which is rated for 180C.
The only issue that will limit your potential power is voltage sag on the batteries and inefficiencies of the system. I expect at least 580 horsepower is doable. The trick to over come some of the voltage sag issues is to run a battery pack voltage higher than what you expect to use voltage wise for the motors, and then limit motor output voltage to what you need for power input needed to the motor to produce the 580 horsepower output. Nearly any good motor controller such as the Zilla's or the Soliton's allows you to independently adjust motor current limit and motor voltage output limit. Motor controllers act like buck DC-DC convertors that trade voltage for current when output voltage is less than input voltage. So you can get more current out on the motor side output of the controller than what you put in on the battery side of the controller, but the voltage will be less. Power is the same. You just made I bigger than E in the formula P= E*I for electrical power. This means battery amps can be made less for the input side of the controller which allows a larger selection of battery possibilities that can meet the discharge current demands when enough are paralleled together per module.
So for example if you want 1200 battery amps with no voltage sag for a few seconds then you will have to add more cells in parallel per module or find a battery that holds voltage at 1200 amps discharge. So at 400 volts input at 1200 amps current draw can get you about 640 horsepower theoretical. The motor voltage side of the controller should be set to about 300 volts and motor current limited to 1600 amps. The motors will be wired in series to each other, I presume, and mechanically linked to each other which means both motors will see about 150 volts at 1600 amps. This is very doable and I bet you will see AT LEAST 580 horsepower minimum at the wheels!
One last issue. Did you do a transient load analysis of the drive train components? I ask this because what may be rated for say 3000 ft*lbs of torque would easily get destroyed by lesser torque if the torque applied is in a fraction of a second such as in milliseconds. This is called shock loading which can easily destroy drive train components rated at much higher torque figures. DC electric motors fed with full current with no delay in rise time can ramp up torque in milliseconds from no torque to full torque easily!!!!! There have been many transmissions and rear ends turned to piles of metal dust internally from first timers that made EV dragsters that did not account for this fact! That is why what would work with gas engines for torque will not for DC electric motors such as what you using which are the Warp 11's. But hey, they say if you never break anything then you never learn so have fun and learn all you can!!
The only issue that will limit your potential power is voltage sag on the batteries and inefficiencies of the system. I expect at least 580 horsepower is doable. The trick to over come some of the voltage sag issues is to run a battery pack voltage higher than what you expect to use voltage wise for the motors, and then limit motor output voltage to what you need for power input needed to the motor to produce the 580 horsepower output. Nearly any good motor controller such as the Zilla's or the Soliton's allows you to independently adjust motor current limit and motor voltage output limit. Motor controllers act like buck DC-DC convertors that trade voltage for current when output voltage is less than input voltage. So you can get more current out on the motor side output of the controller than what you put in on the battery side of the controller, but the voltage will be less. Power is the same. You just made I bigger than E in the formula P= E*I for electrical power. This means battery amps can be made less for the input side of the controller which allows a larger selection of battery possibilities that can meet the discharge current demands when enough are paralleled together per module.
So for example if you want 1200 battery amps with no voltage sag for a few seconds then you will have to add more cells in parallel per module or find a battery that holds voltage at 1200 amps discharge. So at 400 volts input at 1200 amps current draw can get you about 640 horsepower theoretical. The motor voltage side of the controller should be set to about 300 volts and motor current limited to 1600 amps. The motors will be wired in series to each other, I presume, and mechanically linked to each other which means both motors will see about 150 volts at 1600 amps. This is very doable and I bet you will see AT LEAST 580 horsepower minimum at the wheels!
One last issue. Did you do a transient load analysis of the drive train components? I ask this because what may be rated for say 3000 ft*lbs of torque would easily get destroyed by lesser torque if the torque applied is in a fraction of a second such as in milliseconds. This is called shock loading which can easily destroy drive train components rated at much higher torque figures. DC electric motors fed with full current with no delay in rise time can ramp up torque in milliseconds from no torque to full torque easily!!!!! There have been many transmissions and rear ends turned to piles of metal dust internally from first timers that made EV dragsters that did not account for this fact! That is why what would work with gas engines for torque will not for DC electric motors such as what you using which are the Warp 11's. But hey, they say if you never break anything then you never learn so have fun and learn all you can!!
well
The front batteries box would likely incur some damage, hopefully not too much damage to the battery modules, Luckily, these A123 pouches are extremely tolerant and chemically stable so I wouldn't expect any fire.
Power to you man please put up a DIY on those tail lights very nice 
03-31-2013, 07:19 PM
#296
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got a bit of testing done this weekend
Very happy to report that at ~ 44% power, the car is fast. Faster than a Mercedes C320 at least. Such a pleasure to drive as well, it is an incredibly unique car. It makes almost no noise what so ever! I only drove about 10 miles this weekend, but thus far my favorite part of the car is the lack of transmission and the appropriate power to support it. Unlike other cars I have driven, when you give full throttle to the S2000 you instantly speed away. Car's with transmissions have a slow lag in which they shift down in order to increase acceleration.
Currently, my only issue exists in the charger I built. Still working on fixing that headache.....
I have more pictures to share, I will post them tomorrow!
04-01-2013, 05:33 PM
#297
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I had a nice long response typed up, hit backspace while the text box wasn't selected, and everything disappeared. Awesome.
This response will now be shortened:
Update:
1. Got my innovative mounts for the rear differential. Not particularly impressed with the quality of the pieces, there are a couple of small bubbles in the urethane and the center bushing inserts look like they were cut by hand. I was okay with all this, but when I began installing the mounts I found that the diameter of one of the inserts for the front mount was .05 inches too small, resulting in the mounting bolts not fitting through (at all). Ebay seller says I need to contact innovative.
2. I cut the rear differential bracket. Normal write up stuff bla bla bla pictures:
3. Cleaned up wiring:
4. Began designing hard top brackets. No one on here was selling izzy brackets used, decided to design my own. Forbidden brackets supplied with the hard top are made for cars with soft tops installed only, and wont work for me. Redesigning that too.
well that was short and to the point....
This response will now be shortened:
Update:
1. Got my innovative mounts for the rear differential. Not particularly impressed with the quality of the pieces, there are a couple of small bubbles in the urethane and the center bushing inserts look like they were cut by hand. I was okay with all this, but when I began installing the mounts I found that the diameter of one of the inserts for the front mount was .05 inches too small, resulting in the mounting bolts not fitting through (at all). Ebay seller says I need to contact innovative.
2. I cut the rear differential bracket. Normal write up stuff bla bla bla pictures:
3. Cleaned up wiring:
4. Began designing hard top brackets. No one on here was selling izzy brackets used, decided to design my own. Forbidden brackets supplied with the hard top are made for cars with soft tops installed only, and wont work for me. Redesigning that too.
well that was short and to the point....
04-05-2013, 06:33 PM
#300
Just a small tip from a computer guy, next time that happens try not to do anything else and hit Ctrl+Z (it's the keyboard shortcut for undo). It's saved me from a lot of heartache.
