Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

How many panels ? ( to run 230 volt sprinkler pump 30 minutes a day?) - Page 35

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by Ron Rosenfeld on August 1, 2008, 2:25 am
 
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:47:48 -0700 (PDT), bealiba@gmail.com wrote:


meanhttp://www.smartgauge.co.uk/calcs/peukert3.xls?

More GIGO


Even more GIGO


You just dig your hole deeper and deeper.  This is just too funny.

George, your data and arguments represent, in the language of logic,
ignoratio elenchi.

All you have proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that you have no idea
how to apply, nor do you even understand, the theory expounded on the web
site to which Wayne referred you and from which you obtained these SS's.

Even a nitwit should understand, especially after it's been pointed out to
him, that when a computed result conflicts with the actual data, there must
be something wrong with the computation, or with the data supplied to that
computation.

The *manufacturer* published a 1 hr capacity of 161 Ah.

Your inputs on that SS for Peukert's exponent, Battery capacity, and "at
Hour rating" cause the SS to compute a much higher 1 hr capacity of 233Ah
if you use your 1.2/342/10 inputs; or 201Ah if you use your 1.3/342/10
inputs.

But does George question his inputs?    NO!

Does he use the method I suggested to provide proper inputs to that SS?  Of
course not.


George concludes that the manufacturer's published data must be wrong!



Do you really expect anyone to believe that your idiotic results are more
accurate than the manufacturer's data?

--ron

Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on August 1, 2008, 3:22 pm
 
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:25:18 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld


He's certainly done a good job of convincing anyone who might be naive
enough to deal with him, of what they could expect in case of
disagreement.

I wonder if Morris is reading. Do you suppose he still thinks that
there must be *something* he could learn from good ol' George? I'd
like to see Morris or anyone explain how they'd sort the useful from
the deception and delusion.

Wayne




Posted by Ron Rosenfeld on August 1, 2008, 10:48 am
 On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:47:48 -0700 (PDT), bealiba@gmail.com wrote:


Sounds like you're bailing out, George.  You should have done that weeks
ago.

Now that you've posted real numbers for inputs, anyone can see that they
were the wrong numbers to use.  As you write, numbers do not lie.  Although
you can sure try to manipulate them.

Since you seem to be up for challenges, and claim to be walking the walk,
let us know when you've convinced the manufacturer to upgrade his battery
specifications on his web site http://batteryenergy.com.au/   based on your
calculations.

I'm sure a reliable, Australian battery manufacturer would love to be able
to increase the ratings on their batteries so easily.  They might even pay
you a consulting fee for the information.

Here are the current numbers for the 2AS620:


2AS620        
    Ah    A
1 hr    161    161.00
2 hrs    206    103.00
3 hrs    245    81.67
4 hrs    266    66.50
5 hrs    283    56.60
8 hrs    335    41.88
10 hrs    342    34.20
12 hrs    363    30.25
24 hrs    417    17.38
48 hrs    513    10.69
120 hrs    620    5.17
168 hrs    646    3.85
240 hrs    650    2.71

Please let us know when they change that 1 hr rating to your claimed 238Ah,
and it is published on their web site.

Until then, have a good day.
--ron

Posted by bealiba on August 1, 2008, 11:48 am
 
Tweedledee, this is just another example of you lying about numbers.
It clearly states in the table header;

Ampere hour capacity TO 1.8 volts per cell

With no mention of the Amps being drawn. Funny that you keep
forgetting to include this information.

Peukert's is used to calculate the total battery capacity at a given
Amp draw.

What Peukert's says:

 Peukert Equation Calculator

        Peukert's Exponent      1.2                     Peukert
Capacity                693.1565433
        Batt Capacity   342
        At hour rating  10                  Peukert             Total
Amp
 
corrected             Hours
                                  Time           amps
Available
        Discharge Rate
        0.7                     1093.36         0.63            747.86
        6.8                     68.99           10.05           471.87
        13.7                   30.03            23.08           410.78
        20.5                   18.46            37.55           378.79
        27.4                   13.07            53.03           357.61
        34.2                   10.00            69.32           342.00
        68.4                   4.35             159.25          297.73
        102.6                 2.68              259.05          274.54
        136.8                 1.89              365.85          259.19
        171.0                 1.45              478.18          247.87
        205.2                 1.16              595.13          239.00
        239.4                 0.97              716.06          231.74
        273.6                 0.82              840.50          225.64
        307.8                 0.72              968.10          220.38
        342.0                 0.63              1098.58         215.79

        208A                  1.15HR         604.89A        238.35Ah

This is calculated for the total Ah capacity not the capacity at 1.8
Volts.

You really are a liar, but just aren't very good at it.

Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on August 1, 2008, 3:19 pm
 On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:48:38 -0700 (PDT), bealiba@gmail.com wrote:


Aha! So the batteries have some hidden capacity that the manufacturer
has chosen to ignore! What a bunch of wankers! They obviously don't
have your gift for self-promotion. Why not call them and offer to
strukcheral edet their chart? Think of the biziniss opportunity!


Eureka! Having been given a capacity of 161Ah for a 1 hour discharge,
but needing to guess the current <snorf>, it must follow that the
capacity could be far higher if discharged in half the time! If the
company pres had an inkling of your discovery he'd demand to be
informed! It's so important, call him even if it's in the middle of
the night. He's sure to appreciate your diligence.


Is the 208A another typo, or just part of your great discovery? No
matter, considering your logic thus far, increasing the current to
245A will surely increase the capacity even more! But enquiring minds
who want to follow in your brilliant reasoning need to see the power
curve for the 882.35W inverter specified in your deezine. You should
publish that, so that the mortals can learn how well it performs with
a 2500.00W load at the deeziner recommended input of under 1.800V per
cell.


You're sharing your reaffirmation mantra? Your giving nature is an
inspiration to all!

Wayne

This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
 
 
 
 
 
 
  •  
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread