[Prototyping] Modular Rugged Battery system for esk8

Esk8 Dev
#21

@Zach, great work. love these modular designs.

You should ask a mod to move these conversations to a new thread. This deserves a thread of its own and for others to express interest.

2 Likes
#22

You think so? I was gonna polish the design some more before i made anything official. But Maybe its not a terrible Idea. I’ll see about doing it later on today, with a nice lil writeup.

@BillGordon noted!

1 Like
#23

This is a genius design, can be applied to a lot of e vehicles, mostly the ones that use really big packs, easier to make individual ones
Medo you reckon that the BMS will be ok by removing a pack in the middle? I always see that you should first connect the the main leads and them the balance connector, this would be the same as a cell getting shorted?

2 Likes
#24

Now thats something i havent considered! Let me look into this further and try to figure something out

2 Likes
#25

Some BMS will be sacrificed :grinning:

3 Likes
#26

hey this looks cool do you think it could be made to fit in trampa beast boxes

#27

Possibly. Im not sure about the specifics though. If this ends up working out, i’ll try and prototype that!

1 Like
#28

@Zach if you’re using 4p p42a blocks, wouldn’t each block do 180A cont. and 225A burst? If you’re using an XT90 wouldn’t it melt?

#29

Yeah thats another problem. Im considering doubling up the XT90’s, but keeping the form factor agreeable is difficult. Also considering the AS150, but seems very bulky for this application compared to the XT connectors

#30

You could use multiple XT60 to save space

#31

No the AS150 is way nicer since you can have one bullet on the positive side and one in the negative side of the block

1 Like
#32

In that sense of course, but i mean in how to get it mounted flush and to each pack. Not to mention the additional width, which would man having to increase the width of the pocket in the center. The entire unit is already almost 10’ (the width of the deck), so space in the vertical sense is at a premium

@Pedrodemio I considered using the XT60, but with no antispark, it makes hot-swapping a risk.

2 Likes
#33

Hmm that’s a good point, maybe have the bullets on the top and sink into the deck?

#34

It would only be a problem if you swap the packs with the board on

#35

Thats true, Assuming you have an loopkey or something to break the circuit at the end, then sparks shouldn’t be a huge issue. Nonetheless, if i opted for the XT60, id have to use more to achieve the same Amp requirements as fewer XT90’s would achieve.

image
image.png1038×810 44.3 KB

This is a possibility, and using nickel runs wouldnt be the most annoying thing to achieve on the pack side either

The problem then becomes wiring on the inside of the channel. Hmmmm

#36

At this point, you could to a custom PCB the goes on the pack side and board side to hold all connectors perfectly aligned, would make it easier to use a bunch of them

1 Like
#37

Thats True. Truth be told im clueless when it comes to PCB design, so would have to take a couple of night to learn that, and think it through. Not to mention, The copper required to handle such high currents would likely be mucho
Let me see what else i can to do solve this in the meantime

1 Like
#38

On the PCB I would definitely reinforce with wires, using it just for ease of assembly

1 Like
#39

Ahhh i see, Ofcourse.

#40

Hmm, next challenge. The reccomended cable for so many amps is 2 gauge. So here’s what im thinking. 2 XT90’s per pack, in the horizontal position, Connected via 2 gauge cables. this is a max theoretical constant of 180A. This is right on par with the max cont of the cells. Im normally a fan of overbuilding though, so going to keep thinking.

1 Like