Lipo Lowdown From My POV.

[AlanN]

How are you going to measure the capacity of a pack? I'm sure that there is a variation no matter what the label says. The volume (sub C)/number of cells system we currently use is easy to inspect, but has similar objections. Pack weight is fairly easy to inspect, but there must be other effective rating systems.
Lohring Miller

Go by weight and size to measure cap. And unless you want to charge and discharge everyones cells...there really isn't any other easy method to measure.

 

[JfromJAGs]

I have to say prior to these cells I was not quite an enthusiast for lipo in boats, particularly high power boats. These cells reset the parameters within which LiPo operate

I can only second that. If you have'nt seen or measured these cells, you don't know LiPo's yet!

Even the 20/22C series of these cells hold 150A contious for about 60s easily when prewarmed a bit; 100A for about 2.5min. The new and comming 25C (5000mAh) and 30C (4500mAh) cells will probably be even better.

Nitro racers, hold you breath. It will be a totally new experience.

Joerg

 

[Darin Jordan]

Even the 20/22C series of these cells hold 150A contious for about 60s easily when prewarmed a bit; 100A for about 2.5min. The new and comming 25C (5000mAh) and 30C (4500mAh) cells will probably be even better.

Hey guys... dimensionally, how do they compare? For example... What would the size of a 5000mah 2P pack be? Are they basically the same dimesions as the 20C packs we have now??

I ask because I'm working on a couple of boats right now, and would like to know that the Lipos of next season will fit into the same spot as the Lipos I have sitting on my bench (PolyRC 20C series 4350 and 5000 mah...) Also, are the weights similiar? Personally, it would be easier to me to lay out the interior if they were HEAVIER! :blink: Boat design is going to get VERY interesting to get enough weight fwd in a Sport Hydro... Riggers might be interesting too...

Thanks,

 

[JfromJAGs]

As far as I know the 25C 5000mAh will look identical to the previous 20/22C cells. The 30C 4500mAh cell will have the same width (43mm) and length (150mm), but will be slightly thinner (8.1mm instead of 8.6mm). Weight of the 4500mAh will be 112g, the 5000mAh will probably stay at about 118-120g.

As I said before, you guys woke up a dragon.

 

[Darin Jordan]

As far as I know the 25C 5000mAh will look identical to the previous 20/22C cells. The 30C 4500mAh cell will have the same width (43mm) and length (150mm), but will be slightly thinner (8.1mm instead of 8.6mm). Weight of the 4500mAh will be 112g, the 5000mAh will probably stay at about 118-120g.

That's good to know...

Sounds like we need to see if we can get these cells molded into the shape of a wing... We'll be needing to get them WAY up into the nose... OR... put the cockpit WAY up there so we can get the weight of the motor fwd enough...

Should be interesting...

I'm heading down the right path then... making everything so it will work with 1P configs...

Thanks for the info...

 

[Paul Pachmayer]

Hi Guys,

The new cells are;

25C 4350 154x44x9 aprox. 100 grams

20C 4350 162x49x8 aprox. 125 grams

25C 5000 150x43x9 aprox. 132 grams

20C 5000 162x49x10 aprox. 118 grams

That's single cell dims.

As I said before, you guys woke up a dragon.

So, the 30C cells should be out around the end of the month. I'm sure some time in the year we'll probably see 40C plus so what's wrong with having a set of paralled 20C cells or a single 30C cell? Joerg, your arguements will be pointless pretty soon as why parallel setups shouldn't be allowed. And please, "you guys" what's that supposed to mean? Once the flyers started using lipos it was only a matter of time before boaters and car guys started using them. Nobody is forcing you to use them, if you want to stick with nixx cells feel free to do so. But please stop with the bad wrapping, it would come sooner or later and the quicker it happens the better.

You know Joerg, if you actually heat raced in the States I would put more weight to your ideas. I'm sick and tiered of hearing all the BS from back yard bashers and guys who no nothing about lipo powered boats in practice. I was the last guy on our team to make the switch to lipos. I ran Nimh cells and we compared setups and cost of competing at top levels, lipos won. After a full season of running the 4350 cells hard (70 plus cycles @ 120 amps plus) I can't imagine going back to using sub-Cs. I go into this years season with the same cells I used last year. My season starts this weekend (first race of the year) and ends the last week of November.

You can lead, follow or get out of the way because lipos will be common practice now and there's no turning back.

Also BTW; If I sound a bit bitter I am. The select few of you small minded boaters that have been spreading rumors about me think your doing it in private your nuts. I've got a whole folder of forwarded emails and PMs that I'm sure I wasn't supposed to see. You know who you are and in my eyes your worthless.

Paul.

 

[AlanN]

I totally agree with many of Pauls statements.

But I have found that whenever anyone tries something new or different or (heaven forbid) thinks differently than others; there is almost immediate condemnation.

 

[JfromJAGs]

The new cells are;
25C 4350 154x44x9 aprox. 100 grams

20C 4350 162x49x8 aprox. 125 grams

25C 5000 150x43x9 aprox. 132 grams

20C 5000 162x49x10 aprox. 118 grams

What cells are these? These are not Enerland, not the 25C/30C cell I mentioned.

You know who you are and in my eyes your worthless.

I don't know what you are trying to achive with such strong comments. But, I can live with it. I don't know about Emails and PM's. I know I never wrote anything that I would'nt write in public. I never called you anything, I never threatened you or anyone else.

Paul, you are on your own agenda and you got your own background and interests: hobby for yourself and business. I can understand that you are disappointed - but beeing so, you don't open your eyes fully. You look at things from your perspective only - the perspective of mainly big/huge FE boats.

I always said these should be treated differently and I always said 10s2p of 5000mAh cells, even 14s2p could be an option. It's just not right for the small FE boats and it's not right for SAWs in general. That's all I'm saying. This is at least as true as your points about the big boats.

"Waking up a dragon" ment that the current LiPo's are starting a revolution in model boats. Electrics with LiPo technology will be competitive against nitro and gas in their original domain, not only SAWs.

Paul, sit back, have a good (german) beer and get rid of your grief. Our thoughts are not that far appart. And, I'm not going to fight about LiPo's any longer. So, call me whatever you like.

Joerg

 

[Paul Pachmayer]

Hi Joerg.

I don't know what you are trying to achive with such strong comments. But, I can live with it. I don't know about Emails and PM's. I know I never wrote anything that I would'nt write in public. I never called you anything, I never threatened you or anyone else.

That statement wasn't directed at you Joerg.

What cells are these? These are not Enerland, not the 25C/30C cell I mentioned.

Those are the Enerland cell specs, I have them all here in the shop. I personally didn't measure the cells the specs are direct from Enerland.

Paul, you are on your own agenda and you got your own background and interests: hobby for yourself and business. I can understand that you are disappointed - but beeing so, you don't open your eyes fully. You look at things from your perspective only - the perspective of mainly big/huge FE boats.

See Joerg, that's where your wrong. I have 2S, 4S and 6S boats as well in monos, cats and sport hydros. The reason you hear about the big boats all the time is that's where I get most of my play time and it's high profile. My "agenda" is making model boating better, period. It has nothing to do with selling equipment to racers, my main income comes from sport boaters, not racers. Also, why would you think I'm disapointed? I'm actually very happy that (in IMPBA anyway) we are coming up with a very solid set of rules that were worked and agreed upon by almost 100% of the traveling boaters. This is a pretty large group that are very active in the hobby and I have a high regard to thier thoughts and ideas. All these people are from clubs that hold races and without them we have nothing. Many of the guys have yet to field a lipo powered boat and yet still agree on the change, go figure huh?

"Waking up a dragon" ment that the current LiPo's are starting a revolution in model boats. Electrics with LiPo technology will be competitive against nitro and gas in their original domain, not only SAWs.

What's wrong with that? I have a passion for FE boats and it's high time we get them front and center. I started racing nitro boats 20 years ago and I've never been more excited about the hobby as I am now. In short. I have no grief.

Paul.

 

[JfromJAGs]

Well, time will tell - as we both don't give up on our positions concerning 1p, 2p or unlimited.

For the cells: maybe Steve Hill can post the Enerland document he posted on another board the other day.

* the actual 20C 5000mAh cells are 8.6mm x 43mm x 150mm and 118g.

* the new 30C 4500mAh cells are 8.1mm x 43mm x 150mm and 112g.

There will also be 25C 5000mAh cells soon, but I don't have the data sheets for those. I only got the overview document and that's somehow missleading concerning size and weight (pack dimensions given), but I'm pretty sure it will be the same size as before, just better C performance.

162x49x10 (or 8) does'nt look like Enerland sizes to me and is definitely not correct for the current 5000mAh cells. I do have a datasheet of a chinese 20C 5300mAh cell in that size though...

Joerg

 

[Andrewg]

Paul

I wonder if you understand just how involved Joerg is in the development of these new cells or the assessment he has done. The industry people I have spoken to are amazed at the depth of his knowledge and experience and testing.

weights aint racing

owned 3 involved with 4 boats on weekend - all ran 25C 5000 mah cells at our second largest sanctioned event

the first 6S rigger desined from ground up around lipo - speed a 7.5 5 laps nitro oval 2300 mah

the 2nd (owned) 6S mono no step 4 speed like 7.5 and 2200mah in 5.5 laps

the 3rd (owned) 10S 48" mono 2215 2100 mah in 5 laps

the 4th (owned) 10S 43 inch sport hydro 2215/1.5Y in 5 laps 2350 mah - speed right up there with QD 35 Insane and Seaducer sport hydros

In 100+ degree heat these cells came back warm. Not a concern

There is only one reason to go to 2P with the 25C packs and that is so racers spend more money.

IMO there is no reason in terms of performance or safety to push or lead modellors into uneeded mass and complexity - unless its for ballast. I never once heard the advocates of Lipo argue for paralleled nickels cells but now they have 3 times the cost and 50% more power they need parallelling - dont let them pull the wool over your eyes

Joerg

The 150 gm/cell rule is an excellent idea! Good to see it catching on for SAW

 

[JfromJAGs]

Paul, I just came accross your personal BadAss blog: http://feeds.feedburner.com/BadAssBoatBoy

You know what? I think I was way way to polite with you. But, ok, I know now.

Joerg

 

[AlanN]

Politenss has nothing to do with it Joerg. I'm a man and can take it like one. I will not start throwing insults or ranting but will express how I feel.

Not to make this a Rum Running type saga....but how would you like it if we started to express and tell you and or any orginization how or what they could run.

Besides Paul...there are quite a few other boaters that have been testing/running/trying different cells. Do we all have electrical engineering degrees?...no. We are hobby enthusiasts that want to try something different new and hopefully all around better. Are there going to be teething problems and things unknown that might hamper this? Yes of course there are. Have we tried to protect ourselves and others with this tech?.....yes.

Do I have all the answers..no but it sure is an experience finding out.

But to be treated like children and forwarned every post becomes quite exhausting and IMO an undermining as to what we have done. Heck Steve H and plenty others post their "WARNING"s.

Dragon...huh? I am going to play with a dragon or 2 in my hulls.

 

[Andrewg]

Alan

the LIPO debate wherever it is at the moment effects everyone. I find civility very helpful in these debates - we all fall down occassionally, otherwise its real tough to exhange information and ideas - its a necessity if I am goign to list to Joerg Paul or if I expect to be listened to.

For 4S1P on a long course you will find the mono best able to use the power best will be 33" with 1515's - or a 1527 and a 125 or 180 barra. On a short course you can use a smaller hull but the handling will be iffy.

An 8S1P boat would be about 40-42" you would run 1527 or 2215 and a 125-160amp esc

A 4S2P mono will have the same power as an 8S to make best use of its 190A minimum 260A peaks potential you will need - hmm a poptart?, a 36"-42" hull, a 1527 minimum

The price of the boat just went from being less thana 3.5cc to about the same as a 90. To make Lipo afforbable a 6cell/ 2S class ie 4*5000 and 8 cell repalcement 3S2P class ie 6*5000 might be needed or you will have LSH then daylight

The higher S counts will be afforable for who? How many 32 cell baots run regularly in competition - multiply the pack price by 6 times and the hull, essc and ancilliaries price by 2 - have you noticed most of the twins use two radio sets? is that affordable?

The cells Paul "tested" appear not the 25c cells Joerg and I mentioned. They werent tested they were weighed. Further Paul in his own posts on IWW has acknowledged that his boats using old 20C 2P 3700s need larger hulls than a 1P setup. For those clubs with small ovals start looking for bigger lakes real quick.

Most of the main proponents of 2P are among the better off in the model boat community. 1P/mass limit imposes no limitation on them in terms of building bigger more powerful boats - just go up in series no harm in that.

However 1P does keep electric racing classes below the cost of nitro and gas, maintains class differentiation and enables extreme speed ie it has the potential to attract a larger group of racers vs fewer racers. Inclusion is what it is about.

 

[Darin Jordan]

One thing I do notice is the main proponents of 2P have relatively high wealth levels or disposable income. The guys advocating 1P/mass limit are doing it precisely to encourage greater participation while maintaining class seperation and the opportunity for extremely high speeds.

That's simply not accurate... I'm NOT in any way wealthy... I sell stuff to buy stuff, or trade, etc... NONE of my boats are being built for this coming season for use with 2P anything... Everything will be straight up 1P...

We have club members who are working with boats that aren't going to take advantage of the max amp draw, but need/want to parallel in order to use smaller individual packs in the same hulls, etc... One can run 2S1P 4300s or 2S2P saddle pack of 2100s... It'll save them from having to completely re-lay out their hulls... (or so they think... You and I know that with the light weight of these bats... It's going to take moving a lot of things forward! )

There are a VERY SELECT FEW who are going to go anywhere NEAR the extremes you guys are worrying about... Most of the rest of us "proponents" are going to be in the thick part of the bell-curve between those still running nimh and guys like Joerg and Paul who will take it right to the limit and beyond...

Personally, I think the fears are being waged by those who are afraid of what THEY might do!!!

 

[Andrewg]

Darin

you are an excellent example of my case

you like the idea of 2P - but cost restraints prevent you doing it - you feel most people wont do it

Instead of making the majority marginal why not make the main racing classes reflect the ability of the majority to participate? ie create rules which are inclusive

BTW buy some saline bags for water ballast. You may need it if you are using your current hulls - they will be faster - lift will be greater but mass will be less - guess what happens? the saline bags allow the water to be velcroed in and baffled regardlessof the amount needed so it wont slosh about

 

[Darin Jordan]

Darin
you are an excellent example of my case

you like the idea of 2P - but cost restraints prevent you doing it - you feel most people wont do it

Actually... it's not the costs... I would do it if I felt it were necessary... I like the idea of 1P personally... Admittedly, that has changed recently, as the newer tech is showing that to be possible...

If I were to go back and support this effort again, I'd push the route Paul is taking with the IMPBA rules... I think they are heading in the right direction, by not only limiting the "amount" of cell one could carry, but also the size of the hulls... Only by having these two in concert are you truely going to be able to keep things in check...

So, it would be more accurate to state that I don't FEAR 2P... I don't care if someone decides to go that route... I feel I can compete either way... it takes more than just sheer power... and it's not all about raw speed... I've won my share of races where I wasn't the fastest boat on the course, AND everyone stayed upright...

As for the ballast... that's an iteresting idea... I'm building all new boats, lipo specific, for this season... or moving my O-boats to N, etc... so I'm hoping not to need much ballast... But, even in the new pickle-fork sport hydro I'm building, getting enough weight forward is going to be tough... and I'm already figuring out where to put ballast in the nose to get the balance right if necessary...

 

[AlanN]

I think Darrin has the right idea with his setups.

Just becouse you can run 2P does not meant you can't win.

Andrew,

Have you bothered to read the rules that Paul has listed at the top of the electric forum?

We know that the juice we can draw will be overpowering to some class/sizes. Therefore we limit the sizes of the hulls. If anyone can put together a 50 MPH E-1 mono and keep it on the water....they deserve to win the heat. Now that is the way we wish to currently run in IMPBA. I think those in NAMBA will catch on soon enough.

I have mixed testing with 1 and 2p setups and found that the 2p is not necssary for many classes....but when we first started to experiment with Lipos we found that the quality of the cells demanded at least 2p. Now I still will run some 2p so that my draw is easier on my investment. (which has been less that what Nimh costs for my past years racing budget were). I have not thrown out any lipos becouse they "wore out". Lots of nimh have seen the way of the dumpster though.

I think alot of racers will find that 1P will be enough but for those who wish to push or run longer the 2p option is there.

So yes the rules have to bend and flex a bit with the tech but we are working on it.

 

[Andrewg]

Darren

that is consistent with my other point why not specify a system that works and guides people to the right solution instead of one you have to guess at

Alan

yes I read it

In my opinion it is a deeply flawed proposal which is unable to meet and manage the challenge of lithium in its own terms (voltage and mass) and creates a new problem (hull limitations). It is needlessly complex and unworkable for the scrutineers (who surely will never attempt nor be able to police it). Conflict of interest aslo should be addressed as the proposal might be interpreted as being written in favour of particular products and against others.

A glarring omission is primary safety measures. While the secondary flim flam of bags bins and sand buckets are raised the proposal is silent on fundemental, primary safety measures including LiPoly specific chargers, the use of balancers and Lipo voltage cutoff escs or twin (redundant) recievers for larger boats.

Joergs simple and elegant proposal of a voltage and mass limit would have avoided these issues and ensured lithium power was introduced in a way which enhanced the current inventory of boats with more speed and reduced real costs.

The proposal creates a much higher cost structure and will almost certainly require modellors to replace every boat they have if in order to exploit the proposal as written.

To establish whether a boat is legal the proposal at the top of the forum requires the following to be scrutineered

* pack voltage

* pack capacity: can only reliably be checked after a heat by testing the pack used or on "tested and sealed" packs. It requires the scrutineer to cool the pack and discharge (30 minutes) and /or charge (min 1 hour) and discharge (at 1 c min 1 hour). Will this be done before racing or after each heat? How will packs be verified so testing doesnt have to be repeated? What equipment will be used to verify capacity? What will it cost and who will pay for it? How many charger/discharge units will a club purchase? If charging is at a race will racers be given fully discharged packs which will require larger deep cycles batteries or a more expensive generator to recharge their packs? Or is it more likely this critical specification simply never be scrutineered because it is too cumbersome to do so?

* hull length - is tied to more cells more capacity and mostly much larger motors (more on that lately) that also means larger escs. So a reduced cost opprotunity with more performance has been lost in the face of a very high cost proposal (unless you choose not to use it in which case - why have it?)

* motor weight - the motor has to be removed and weighed (the question arises is this with or without plugs, cooling jacket and thrust bearings? Motor removal is inconvenient. Simialr wuestion apply regarding when this will be done etc. To me this is complex, poorly defined and the mass specs are very odd given battery capacity and power).

Conflict of interest. Vendors should not get involved in rule proposals. If they sell the equipment they are mandating they are too easily percieved as having a conflict of interest. This effect is greater should they slip up and exclude a competitors product. I only looked at one area motor mass. IMO the proposal is so poorly thought through, a search for further examples isnt neecessary. The motor categories voltage and mass are:

e1 7.4v 13.5oz

e2 14.8v 13.5oz

e3 22.2v 38oz

e4 any motor or number of motors

In E1 why 13.5oz? No idea - but it does allow in the Lehner 2230/5s in mono. If this motor wasnt there - hmm a it would be a Neu benefit. Why was the limit not set vis motor efficiency and throughtput and heat to be dissapated?

Very puzzling is E2 with twice the throughput in watts why still only 13.5oz? If the E1 mass is valid twice as much power and waste heat would be best utilised/coped with by a motor at of 27oz.

In a 33" hull with 10AH the best motor available by a country mile are Neu 1521 (17oz) & 1527 (22oz). They are my choice even at 6S or only 3S2P using the proposal's terms. They are even better at 4s2P. If it had been 27oz in future the use of a D wind Neu 2215 (25oz) woould also be possible. I am sure 13.5oz wasnt adopted to prevent the use of the Neus or to make the Lehner the only viable motor but the author especially in view of his commerical interests should have addressed this in supporting notes for the proposal. He has made not effort to address it. That is at least very sloppy.

E3 is where my brow furrows. In E2 power went up 100% and motor mass was static. In E3 it rises 50% and mass goes up 281%. And 38oz what is that? 2lb 6oz - that isnt a standard measure not 1/4's or 1/2's an odd weight. I am sure this wasnt done to allows the Lehner 3040 (35.7oz) in or to preclude a D wind in the now available Neu 2230 (40+oz).

Given the waste heat will rise in proportion to the voltage (I am assuming all classes will run at 224- 250 amps) why not a uniform progression in motor mass as given fairly uniform cuirrent draw waste heat will be closley related to voltage levels? eg 13.5oz; 27oz; 40.5oz, 73oz that seems more logical to me. This would eliminate questions on the E2 and E3 limits and allow a large variety of barely affordbale motors to run in open.

In the larger class a 73 oz limit would allow only one of the larger 3080's to be used and make motors like the Neu 2230 and the NEU MOM motors more competitive with the larger Lehner. But then that isnt what the proposal says.

While I am sure the intention was not to favour one brand over another, it would be better if the proposal was based on consistent and logical motor sizing and could not be so easily shown to favour one brand over another.

In summary every issue raised here could have been avoided by simply leaving things as they are and instituting a specific voltage + mass limit in each class to create an effective limit - primarily on cost.

This would ensure Lipo was could be tailored to the current boats of modellers to provide much more performance at least cost.

The cost structure is unaffordable eg An entry class brushless E1 mono with a Lehner 2230/5 or 6 ($258)!!, a MGM 224 amp esc ($399)!! and $250 lipo pack will cost $807 for batteries esc and motor - Add to that hardware, hull, radio, connectors, plugs, props, boom box for the lipos, a large charger, 2*5S balancers etc. Its agreat recipe simple inexpensive and not at all overpowered. The E2 will cost more than a 3.5 far more; 6S will be a 90 sized hull with comensurate costs.

The tragedy is no one has thought thru what happens when you double power and mass..... not much more is the answer - so again why do it?

Adopting the simpler proposal would allow an entire heat to be scrutineered in less than 1 minute with a voltmeter and digital scale, opportunties for cheating would be minimised and likelihood of detection maximised.

People wouldnt have to learn new complex rules and would have far less opportunity for the sort of inconsistencies which give rise to consideration of conflict of interest type issues which can only blow up in the face of the people who drafted the rules and the people trying to administer them.

In short the proposal is a very complex and a not very competent solution to a very simple problem

 

[Paul Pachmayer]

Hey Guys,

Just got back from the first race of the year, sure did fall behind on the posts.

Joerg,

* the actual 20C 5000mAh cells are 8.6mm x 43mm x 150mm and 118g.

That is the 25C cell data. I have no info on the 30C cells, just like I said.

162x49x10 (or 8) does'nt look like Enerland sizes to me and is definitely not correct for the current 5000mAh cells.

That is the 20C cell data right off Enerlands data sheet.