@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.
@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.
You think so? I was gonna polish the design some more before i made anything official. But Maybe its not a terrible Idea. Iâll see about doing it later on today, with a nice lil writeup.
@BillGordon noted!
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?
Now thats something i havent considered! Let me look into this further and try to figure something out
Some BMS will be sacrificed
hey this looks cool do you think it could be made to fit in trampa beast boxes
Possibly. Im not sure about the specifics though. If this ends up working out, iâll try and prototype that!
@Zach if youâre using 4p p42a blocks, wouldnât each block do 180A cont. and 225A burst? If youâre using an XT90 wouldnât it melt?
Yeah thats another problem. Im considering doubling up the XT90âs, but keeping the form factor agreeable is difficult. Also considering the AS150, but seems very bulky for this application compared to the XT connectors
You could use multiple XT60 to save space
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
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 10â (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.
Hmm thatâs a good point, maybe have the bullets on the top and sink into the deck?
It would only be a problem if you swap the packs with the board on
Thats true, Assuming you have an loopkey or something to break the circuit at the end, then sparks shouldnât be a huge issue. Nonetheless, if i opted for the XT60, id have to use more to achieve the same Amp requirements as fewer XT90âs would achieve.
The problem then becomes wiring on the inside of the channel. Hmmmm
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
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
On the PCB I would definitely reinforce with wires, using it just for ease of assembly
Ahhh i see, Ofcourse.
Hmm, next challenge. The reccomended cable for so many amps is 2 gauge. So hereâs what im thinking. 2 XT90âs 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.