[EVDL List]

Bad and inacurate information. A home charger J1772 220v 30amp from HD is
only $799.00. Anybody who has a EV plug in should have one of these and not
a 110v that takes forever. You dont want to get stuck somewhere and have to
use 110v.

--
View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVLN-EV-charging-for-dummies-tp4656390p4656407.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

not to state the obvious, but that's just the plug. You still need a cha=
rger, which is another $1-2k for a higher power charger.

david.
http://www.evalbum.com/4021

>________________________________
> From: Cruisin <xxx@xxx.xxx>
>To: xxx@xxx.xxx.edu =

>Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 3:23 PM
>Subject: Re: [EVDL] EVLN: EV charging for dummies
> =

>Bad and inacurate information. A home charger J1772 220v 30amp from HD is
>only $799.00. Anybody who has a EV plug in should have one of these and not
>a 110v that takes forever. You dont want to get stuck somewhere and have to
>use 110v.
>
>--

_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

[quote]Cruisin wrote:

> Bad and inacurate information. A home charger J1772 220v 30amp from HD is
> only $799.00. Anybody who has a EV plug in should have one of these and
> not a 110v that takes forever. You dont want to get stuck somewhere and
> have to use 110v.

I assume you are reacting to cost mentioned in the statement "most manufacturers recommend that you buy and install a vehicle charging station at home. The station usually requires a dedicated circuit, and costs around $2,000 including installation".

$800 for the EVSE alone (it is not a charger) is only part of the equation; add the 40A 240V breaker for your panel, a cable run from your panel to the EVSE installation location, costs for an electrician to do the work, plus any permit or inspection costs and the "around $2000" installed cost probably isn't at all unreasonable.

Sure, at one end of the spectrum will be the person who has a suitable 240V outlet already in their garage so that installation consists of the $800 EVSE and a $10 range cord for it to plug into the existing outlet, but at the other end of the spectrum is the homeowner who has to have a new subpanel wired in because they don't have space for another 40A 240V circuit, or worse yet, is in an older home and finds they need to have a larger service and meter base installed to support an additional 40A load.

I don't follow your reasoning that what EVSE you install at home affects what happens if you get stuck somewhere [else] needing a charge. Even if you have the foresight to carry your 240V EVSE around in the vehicle with you, good luck finding a suitable 240V 40A outlet to plug it into should you find yourself away from home and in dire need of a charge.

You may not want to have to use a 120V outlet to charge, but if you find yourself in need of a charge away from home and there isn't a public J1772 EVSE to plug into, having the ability to opportunity charge from a far more readily available 120V outlet will be far more useful even if it is slower. ;^>

Cheers,

Roger.


_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

[ref original post
http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVLN-EV-charging-for-dummies-tp4656390.html
]


Sidebar
How much harder would it be to also have a NEMA 5-15 male inlet right
next to the other two coupler inlets on a 2010+ Production EV/pih (i.e.:
the Leaf EV). Then we would not need to carry around an Level-1 EVSE, it
would be internally built-in/on-board at all times.

We would only need to carry with us a 50' and 25' 12-3 extension cord (I
always carried both just in case, which saved my bacon many a time).
This is where a conversion EV has an advantage which usually has a 5-15
inlet so you only have to be concerned with someone vandalizing or
stealing your cheap/easily replaceable extension cord, and not an
expensive/must-have Level-1 EVSE unit.

The extra space next to the J1772 and Level-3 inlets on a Leaf EV could
be designed to have a drop in 5-15 inlet, or the type of plug used in
Europe, Australia, Asia, etc. Where ever the EV/pih is sold it is likely
to not be sent out of the country, but if it was, my aforementioned idea
would let the owner get the appropriate inlet swapped in, or be able to
adapt to it. Obviously, an easy implementation of this idea is to just
use the dual 120/240VAC EVSE that comes with the Leaf but wire it up
internally to the aforementioned inlet.

As posted, I would also carry along with me a Level-2 EVSE for when I am
at grandma's using her dryer outlet, or a RV park that is EV friendly,
etc. In those cases, the location would be rather safe, or I would be
near if it was exposed.

But at an airport's extended stay parking lot (i.e. driver won't return
for days), if a level-1 outlet is offered, I really would rather only
have a expendable extension cord exposed to harm/finding a new home than
a dangling EVSE.


{brucedp.150m.com}



-
[quote] Roger Stockton wrote:
> Cruisin wrote:
>
> > Bad and inacurate information. A home charger J1772 220v 30amp from HD is
> > only $799.00. Anybody who has a EV plug in should have one of these and
> > not a 110v that takes forever. You dont want to get stuck somewhere and
> > have to use 110v.
>
> I assume you are reacting to cost mentioned in the statement "most
> manufacturers recommend that you buy and install a vehicle charging
> station at home. The station usually requires a dedicated circuit, and
> costs around $2,000 including installation".
>
> $800 for the EVSE alone (it is not a charger) is only part of the
> equation; add the 40A 240V breaker for your panel, a cable run from your
> panel to the EVSE installation location, costs for an electrician to do
> the work, plus any permit or inspection costs and the "around $2000"
> installed cost probably isn't at all unreasonable.
>
> Sure, at one end of the spectrum will be the person who has a suitable
> 240V outlet already in their garage so that installation consists of the
> $800 EVSE and a $10 range cord for it to plug into the existing outlet,
> but at the other end of the spectrum is the homeowner who has to have a
> new subpanel wired in because they don't have space for another 40A 240V
> circuit, or worse yet, is in an older home and finds they need to have a
> larger service and meter base installed to support an additional 40A
> load.
>
> I don't follow your reasoning that what EVSE you install at home affects
> what happens if you get stuck somewhere [else] needing a charge. Even if
> you have the foresight to carry your 240V EVSE around in the vehicle with
> you, good luck finding a suitable 240V 40A outlet to plug it into should
> you find yourself away from home and in dire need of a charge.
>
> You may not want to have to use a 120V outlet to charge, but if you find
> yourself in need of a charge away from home and there isn't a public
> J1772 EVSE to plug into, having the ability to opportunity charge from a
> far more readily available 120V outlet will be far more useful even if it
> is slower. ;^>
-

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Faster than the air-speed velocity of an
unladen european swallow

_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

[quote]Bruce EVangel Parmenter wrote:

> How much harder would it be to also have a NEMA 5-15 male inlet right
> next to the other two coupler inlets on a 2010+ Production EV/pih (i.e.:
> the Leaf EV). Then we would not need to carry around an Level-1 EVSE, it
> would be internally built-in/on-board at all times.

Harder (i.e. costlier) than you might think, I expect. Consider that the onboard charger relies on the J1772 pilot signal to tell it how much AC current is available, so a NEMA 5-15 inlet would need to include a pilot signal generator to advise the charger not to draw more than 12A.

Clearly, the NEMA inlet and its pilot signal cannot simply be connected in parallel with the AC power connections and pilot signal from the J1772 connector. If the power connections were directly paralleled, then connecting AC via one connector would energise the contacts of the other. This could get exciting if one were to plug into a J1772 EVSE and ended up with 240VAC on the exposed male pins of the 5-15 inlet...

So, at least a double pole, double throw relay rated for the maximum AC input of the charger would need to be used to connect one and only one of the two inlets to the charger. It seems that powering the relay coil from the J1772 AC pins would be sensible, so that if the potentially faster charging J1772 connector is plugged in, the charger will choose it rather than the 5-15. However, the J1772 connector could be 120VAC or 208VAC or 240VAC, etc., so probably better to power the coil via a universal input power supply powered from the J1772 rather than directly from the AC.

The pilot signal is a bit more problematic. In a real/proper J1772 implementation, the *charger* is responsible for detecting the pilot signal (and monitoring that its frequency and duty cycle both stay within valid limits), and is responsible for actively loading the pilot signal to request AC from the EVSE. Since AC will not be present on the J1772 power pins until the charger sees a valid pilot signal and handshakes with the EVSE, it might be a bit trickier to implement a means for the vehicle to automatically switch from a NEMA power source to the J1772.

> This is where a conversion EV has an advantage which usually has a 5-15
> inlet so you only have to be concerned with someone vandalizing or
> stealing your cheap/easily replaceable extension cord, and not an
> expensive/must-have Level-1 EVSE unit.

How many extension cords did you lose or have vandalized during the years of driving and publicly charging your Blazer?

Given the relatively small number of owners who might use the 120V charge capability in public places with any frequency, I think it would make more sense to use the OEM opportunity charge cord, but close the door on the cord so that the only bits outside of the vehicle are a length long enough to plug into the J1772 inlet and the NEMA plug end that plugs into the 'expendable' extension cord used to reach from the vehicle to the outlet.

Cheers,

Roger.


_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

Thanks Roger for your response.

I was not concerned with losing extension cords.

I was concerned with losing either the Level-1 EVSE that comes with the Leaf
or the Level-2 EVSE I would buy and carry with me.

When I would use either, it would be dangling outside where anyone could
mess with it. Since I would leave for hours to kill time (restaurant, movie,
shopping, etc.), I would want to try to secure either of those with some
sort of cable lock to the vehicle. I would want there when I get back.

This is approach I used when I connected to power via an Avcon using the EAA
Avcon adapter I encouraged to be created. I would cable lock the adapter to
my bumper. Went I got back to my Blazer, sometimes I would find someone had
moved it, but gave up once they saw it was locked up.


My original thought was that that Level-1 EVSE that comes with the Leaf, the
manufacture would install internally so, it would be powered via the 5-15
inlet I suggested, and the output would be directly connected to the
built-in charger.

The built-in charger would have to be able to lock out all other power
inputs to only use the first one plugged in\providing power. So, if I
applied power via the proposed 5-15 inlet, alos plugging in the J1772 or
Level-3 inlet would do nothing and not be used. And vice-verse, applying
power using the J1772 inlet, the 5-15 and Level-3 inlet would be disabled. I
am thinking, that method would resolve the pilot issue as only one is being
used (etc.).

While I agree the the number of Level-1 users would be less, having this
5-15 inlet would be a very easy selling point, and as it has been posted so
many-many times, there is level-1 everywhere.

I would like to know that at anytime, I could quickly plug into a regular
120VAC outlet easily using an expendable extension cord (basically, thieves
can mess with extension cord all they want, but do not mess with any EVSE I
'need' that is expensive and time-consuming to replace).


{brucedp.150m.com}

--
View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVLN-EV-charging-for-dummies-tp4656390p4656413.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

Sorry, but I disagree entirely. There seems to be some sort of conspiracy going on that is saying you have to use an 'EVSE' or risk dying a horrible death. Just use a properly installed 240V socket with earth leakage protection - $50 instead of $800 - assuming you haven't got one already. Anyway, most people wont need to charge anywhere near the full pack every day and for them 110V will be fine. Fortunately here in the EU (UK in may case) we all have ready access to 240V sockets - these are the norm.

MW


[quote] Cruisin wrote:

> Bad and inacurate information. A home charger J1772 220v 30amp from HD is
> only $799.00. Anybody who has a EV plug in should have one of these and not
> a 110v that takes forever. You dont want to get stuck somewhere and have to
> use 110v.
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVLN-EV-charging-for-dummies-tp4656390p4656407.html
> Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> | Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
> | Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
> |
> | REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

[quote]brucedp5 wrote:

> I was not concerned with losing extension cords.
>
> I was concerned with losing either the Level-1 EVSE that comes with
> the Leaf or the Level-2 EVSE I would buy and carry with me.

My point was to determine how much of this is simply fear mongering.

Someone who would swipe a Level-1 EVSE from a car plugged in at a public place is just as likely (more likely, IMHO) to swipe an ordinary extension cord in the same situation.

If you weren't losing extension cords with any frequency over the years that you operated your Blazer, then I have to conclude that there is no evidence of a real problem needing to be solved.

> When I would use either, it would be dangling outside where anyone could
> mess with it.

That's a choice you are free to make, if you enjoy the thrill of worrying about whether or not your EVSE will still be there when you return ;^>

My suggestion (which you seem to ignore?), is the no-cost option of simply leaving the costly/valuable/less readily replaced EVSE portion locked inside the vehicle where it cannot be readily stolen. Your suggestion of securing the EVSE to the outside of the vehicle is another approach with minimal cost.

> My original thought was that that Level-1 EVSE that comes with the Leaf,
> the manufacture would install internally so, it would be powered via the
> 5-15 inlet I suggested, and the output would be directly connected to the
> built-in charger.
>
> The built-in charger would have to be able to lock out all other power
> inputs to only use the first one plugged in\providing power. So, if I
> applied power via the proposed 5-15 inlet, alos plugging in the J1772 or
> Level-3 inlet would do nothing and not be used. And vice-verse, applying
> power using the J1772 inlet, the 5-15 and Level-3 inlet would be disabled.
> I am thinking, that method would resolve the pilot issue as only one is
> being used (etc.).

I don't think this approach actually simplifies much. You still end up with two separate power runs to the charger, and the charger must till contain one or more relays to allow connecting itself to one of the power inputs without cross-connecting AC from one inlet to the other. With the J1772 inlet, the charger monitors the proximity signal so that it can detect if a cord is plugged in and prevent driveaway even if AC is absent. It can also use this signal to terminate the load before the power contacts separate upon disconnection. Then there is the pilot signal. It is possible that the charger could be modified to accept pilot signals from both sources, or to treat the 5-15 inlet differently, and use it preferentially with a hard-coded AC current limit whenever line voltage is sensed on its pins.

Ultimately, this adds cost to *every* vehicle produced, in order to satisfy an unlikely need that is perceived by few potential buyers. I disagree with you that this would be an easy sell.

The OEMs provide a flimsy, inconvenient scissor jack for use in the infrequent emergency requiring a tire to be changed. Sure, they could provide a nice hydraulic jack that the small subset of owners unfortunate enough to suffer flats routinely would appreciate (they could even build a pneumatic jack into each corner of the vehicle to allow easily raising any wheel at the push of a button, catering to the even smaller subset of owners who both suffer flats routinely and are unable to operate a manual jack easily). They don't because either of these would add cost to every vehicle sold and benefit such a small percentage of the potential ownership that increase in cost would reduce the number of sales by a far greater amount than the number of additional sales the feature might attract.

> I would like to know that at anytime, I could quickly plug into a regular
> 120VAC outlet easily using an expendable extension cord (basically,
> thieves can mess with extension cord all they want, but do not mess with
> any EVSE I 'need' that is expensive and time-consuming to replace).

I think we've established that there are already at least two ways to achieve this without adding cost or complexity to every vehicle. Mission accomplished, I think! ;^>

Cheers,

Roger.


_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

Bruce,

Did you consider modifying the level 1 ESVE cable? You don't need a second
cable. Here's one company that will do it, for example:

http://evseupgrade.com/

Peri

-----Original Message-----
From: xxx@xxx.xxx.edu [mailto:xxx@xxx.xxx.edu] On Behalf
Of Roger Stockton
Sent: 11 July, 2012 7:56 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EVLN: EV charging for dummies

[quote]brucedp5 wrote:

> I was not concerned with losing extension cords.
>
> I was concerned with losing either the Level-1 EVSE that comes with
> the Leaf or the Level-2 EVSE I would buy and carry with me.

My point was to determine how much of this is simply fear mongering.

Someone who would swipe a Level-1 EVSE from a car plugged in at a public
place is just as likely (more likely, IMHO) to swipe an ordinary extension
cord in the same situation.

If you weren't losing extension cords with any frequency over the years that
you operated your Blazer, then I have to conclude that there is no evidence
of a real problem needing to be solved.

> When I would use either, it would be dangling outside where anyone could
> mess with it.

That's a choice you are free to make, if you enjoy the thrill of worrying
about whether or not your EVSE will still be there when you return ;^>

My suggestion (which you seem to ignore?), is the no-cost option of simply
leaving the costly/valuable/less readily replaced EVSE portion locked inside
the vehicle where it cannot be readily stolen. Your suggestion of securing
the EVSE to the outside of the vehicle is another approach with minimal
cost.

> My original thought was that that Level-1 EVSE that comes with the Leaf,
> the manufacture would install internally so, it would be powered via the
> 5-15 inlet I suggested, and the output would be directly connected to the
> built-in charger.
>
> The built-in charger would have to be able to lock out all other power
> inputs to only use the first one plugged in\providing power. So, if I
> applied power via the proposed 5-15 inlet, alos plugging in the J1772 or
> Level-3 inlet would do nothing and not be used. And vice-verse, applying
> power using the J1772 inlet, the 5-15 and Level-3 inlet would be disabled.
> I am thinking, that method would resolve the pilot issue as only one is
> being used (etc.).

I don't think this approach actually simplifies much. You still end up with
two separate power runs to the charger, and the charger must till contain
one or more relays to allow connecting itself to one of the power inputs
without cross-connecting AC from one inlet to the other. With the J1772
inlet, the charger monitors the proximity signal so that it can detect if a
cord is plugged in and prevent driveaway even if AC is absent. It can also
use this signal to terminate the load before the power contacts separate
upon disconnection. Then there is the pilot signal. It is possible that
the charger could be modified to accept pilot signals from both sources, or
to treat the 5-15 inlet differently, and use it preferentially with a
hard-coded AC current limit whenever line voltage is sensed on its pins.

Ultimately, this adds cost to *every* vehicle produced, in order to satisfy
an unlikely need that is perceived by few potential buyers. I disagree with
you that this would be an easy sell.

The OEMs provide a flimsy, inconvenient scissor jack for use in the
infrequent emergency requiring a tire to be changed. Sure, they could
provide a nice hydraulic jack that the small subset of owners unfortunate
enough to suffer flats routinely would appreciate (they could even build a
pneumatic jack into each corner of the vehicle to allow easily raising any
wheel at the push of a button, catering to the even smaller subset of owners
who both suffer flats routinely and are unable to operate a manual jack
easily). They don't because either of these would add cost to every vehicle
sold and benefit such a small percentage of the potential ownership that
increase in cost would reduce the number of sales by a far greater amount
than the number of additional sales the feature might attract.

> I would like to know that at anytime, I could quickly plug into a regular
> 120VAC outlet easily using an expendable extension cord (basically,
> thieves can mess with extension cord all they want, but do not mess with
> any EVSE I 'need' that is expensive and time-consuming to replace).

I think we've established that there are already at least two ways to
achieve this without adding cost or complexity to every vehicle. Mission
accomplished, I think! ;^>

Cheers,

Roger.


_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev


_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[EVDL List]

Thanks Roger for your thoughts/views.

Perhaps you had to be there pushing the envelope like I was, or perhaps
after being stuck for lack of infrastructure and support back then, that
heightened my fears/concerns. I was vandalized several times, but was
also smart enough to have a back up plan (6 on-board chargers, a gym bag
of adapters, and a back seat of extension cords) when I was out in the
middle of nowhere.

IMO The locking of the dangling Avcon adapter is also just has kludgy
looking as today's Level-1 EVSE the Leaf comes with. It just seems to be
cleaner-looking to only have an extension cord coming to and from the
EV, than all that 'stuff' dangling off it.

Appearances, another point I am concerned with, potential consumer's
opinion/how does it visually affect them. While I am sure I could find a
way to secure the Leaf's L1 EVSE, it would not stop the non-EV driving
public from forming 'OGM what a nightmare' opinions of how to
fill-the-EV-tank (as it were). My other goal it to minimize their silly
notions whenever possible (yea, I know that is a near impossible task,
but still I try).


{brucedp.150m.com}




-
[quote] Roger Stockton wrote:
> brucedp5 wrote:
>
> > I was not concerned with losing extension cords.
> >
> > I was concerned with losing either the Level-1 EVSE that comes with
> > the Leaf or the Level-2 EVSE I would buy and carry with me.
>
> My point was to determine how much of this is simply fear mongering.
>
> Someone who would swipe a Level-1 EVSE from a car plugged in at a public
> place is just as likely (more likely, IMHO) to swipe an ordinary
> extension cord in the same situation.
>
> If you weren't losing extension cords with any frequency over the years
> that you operated your Blazer, then I have to conclude that there is no
> evidence of a real problem needing to be solved.
>
> > When I would use either, it would be dangling outside where anyone could
> > mess with it.
>
> That's a choice you are free to make, if you enjoy the thrill of worrying
> about whether or not your EVSE will still be there when you return ;^>
>
> My suggestion (which you seem to ignore?), is the no-cost option of
> simply leaving the costly/valuable/less readily replaced EVSE portion
> locked inside the vehicle where it cannot be readily stolen. Your
> suggestion of securing the EVSE to the outside of the vehicle is another
> approach with minimal cost.
>
> > My original thought was that that Level-1 EVSE that comes with the Leaf,
> > the manufacture would install internally so, it would be powered via the
> > 5-15 inlet I suggested, and the output would be directly connected to the
> > built-in charger.
> >
> > The built-in charger would have to be able to lock out all other power
> > inputs to only use the first one plugged in\providing power. So, if I
> > applied power via the proposed 5-15 inlet, alos plugging in the J1772 or
> > Level-3 inlet would do nothing and not be used. And vice-verse, applying
> > power using the J1772 inlet, the 5-15 and Level-3 inlet would be disabled.
> > I am thinking, that method would resolve the pilot issue as only one is
> > being used (etc.).
>
> I don't think this approach actually simplifies much. You still end up
> with two separate power runs to the charger, and the charger must till
> contain one or more relays to allow connecting itself to one of the power
> inputs without cross-connecting AC from one inlet to the other. With the
> J1772 inlet, the charger monitors the proximity signal so that it can
> detect if a cord is plugged in and prevent driveaway even if AC is
> absent. It can also use this signal to terminate the load before the
> power contacts separate upon disconnection. Then there is the pilot
> signal. It is possible that the charger could be modified to accept
> pilot signals from both sources, or to treat the 5-15 inlet differently,
> and use it preferentially with a hard-coded AC current limit whenever
> line voltage is sensed on its pins.
>
> Ultimately, this adds cost to *every* vehicle produced, in order to
> satisfy an unlikely need that is perceived by few potential buyers. I
> disagree with you that this would be an easy sell.
>
> The OEMs provide a flimsy, inconvenient scissor jack for use in the
> infrequent emergency requiring a tire to be changed. Sure, they could
> provide a nice hydraulic jack that the small subset of owners unfortunate
> enough to suffer flats routinely would appreciate (they could even build
> a pneumatic jack into each corner of the vehicle to allow easily raising
> any wheel at the push of a button, catering to the even smaller subset of
> owners who both suffer flats routinely and are unable to operate a manual
> jack easily). They don't because either of these would add cost to every
> vehicle sold and benefit such a small percentage of the potential
> ownership that increase in cost would reduce the number of sales by a far
> greater amount than the number of additional sales the feature might
> attract.
>
> > I would like to know that at anytime, I could quickly plug into a regular
> > 120VAC outlet easily using an expendable extension cord (basically,
> > thieves can mess with extension cord all they want, but do not mess with
> > any EVSE I 'need' that is expensive and time-consuming to replace).
>
> I think we've established that there are already at least two ways to
> achieve this without adding cost or complexity to every vehicle. Mission
> accomplished, I think! ;^>
-

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

_______________________________________________
| Moratorium on drag racing discussion is in effect.
| Please take those discussions elsewhere. Thanks.
|
| REPLYING: address your message to xxx@xxx.xxx.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| CONFIGURE: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev