Monthly Archives: January 2016

Cars in the 21st century

The following article is retrieved from here

 

Former Boulder Mayor Will Toor’s letter to City Council urging it to take a leadership role in encouraging adoption of electric vehicles presents the council with an interesting dilemma.

On the one hand, accelerating the adoption of electric cars would help to reduce vehicle emissions, an important part of the city’s climate action plan.

On the other, the leadership of this council has been trying to achieve that goal by coercing people out of their cars onto buses or bikes, so it may find it difficult now to embrace cars of any kind.

As Toor acknowledged in a meeting with the Camera’s editorial board last week, much of the strife around recent transportation policy, including the battle over reducing lanes on Folsom Street, comes from a sense that city officials are wagging their fingers reprovingly at drivers for doing what most Americans do — getting from place to place by car — while providing no realistic alternative for many of them.

Toor’s proposal casts drivers as part of the solution and offers hope of a less divisive municipal approach to reducing emissions. With the country now on a course to clean up its sources of electric power, EVs present an opportunity to transfer those gains over time to the transportation sector. Even if the city were to meet its highly optimistic projections of behavior modification, Toor contends it would get only about halfway to its auto emission reduction goals. Another solution is needed.

Electric cars are not exactly in their infancy, having debuted in the 19th century, but technology is improving their utility rapidly. Tesla has revolutionized the field with high-end, high-performance cars. It is an open secret in the tech community that Apple is working on its own electric car, according to Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk. Traditional car companies’ electric offerings are improving their range per charge slowly but surely.

Although Boulder likes to think of itself as cutting edge in environmental matters, it trails the cities leading the way in automobile innovation, perhaps because of its leadership’s apparent antipathy for cars generally. As Camera business columnist Sean Maher pointed out earlier this month, leading cities are aggressively enabling experiments with self-driving cars. On Thursday, the Obama administration proposed a 10-year, $4 billion campaign to speed development of that technology. Combine it with EVs and car-sharing applications, and we could see fleets of shared, driverless, electric cars, reducing congestion, emissions and the need for on-site parking.

“If you are skeptical about encouraging more cars in Boulder, consider the evidence that driverless cars will be amazingly green,” Maher wrote. “In his book, ‘Clean Disruption,’ entrepreneur and Stanford professor Tony Seba argues that autonomous vehicles will eventually be all-electric and operate under a business model that is a cross between car share and Uber. If Seba is right — and he makes a very persuasive case — this disruptive force will not only make auto travel safer and faster, it will make it infinitely cleaner and less intrusive.”

The city could take a number of steps to encourage this future, including converting city-owned fleets, offering incentives for workplace chargers and joining Boulder County in a group-buying program that offers substantial discounts to electric car buyers. The county’s program last fall resulted in a quadrupling of electric car sales in a four-month period — with only a single dealership participating. More are expected to join the program this year.

City staff has laid the groundwork for some of these initiatives. Last year, the planning department, along with the county and CU, contracted with the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, where Toor runs the transportation program, to evaluate Boulder’s electric vehicle infrastructure. But, as Toor pointed out, it needs council’s active support to become a core part of the climate plan.

Technological innovation in this field seems likely to whiz past Boulder’s 20th-century central planning based on bikes and diesel buses. Shared fleets of electric cars could even solve mass transit’s first mile/last mile problem in spread-out jurisdictions like Colorado. If technology ultimately provides a way for each car to be cleaner and serve more people, next-generation autos might yet turn out to be the best solution to the issues of climate and congestion that now plague us. It is time Boulder’s elected officials opened their minds to this possibility.

—Dave Krieger, for the editorial board. Email: kriegerd@dailycamera.com. Twitter:@DaveKrieger

Submission of Progress/End Report through RADIS

Dear Researchers,

Please complete and submit your Progress Report/End Report for the period of July – Dec 2015 (Dec 2015) through RADIS.

For any inquiry please call RMC, Monitoring Unit:  Mr. Amirul (37883), Mrs. Illani (37873), Ms. Azizah (37830).

Many thanks for those who have completed your progress/end report in RADIS.

Regards,

Prof. Madya Dr. Shukor Abd Razak

Timbalan Pengarah Pengurusan Projek

Pusat Pengurusan Penyelidikan

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Tel:(6)07-5537803

Fax:(6)075566177

http://www.rmc.utm.my – RMC Portal

http://www.rmconline.utm.my – RMC Helpdesk

https://radis.utm.my – Research and Development Information System

IEEE Signal Processing Research Excellence Awards 2015

For the first time, IEEE Signal Processing Society Malaysia Chapter will be giving out the Research Excellence Awards. Nominations are opened for all PhD/Masters graduates and researchers. The awards are initiated to recognize the excellent works conducted in the area of signal processing in past year 2015. The award recipients will be invited to receive the award during IPIARTI/SASSP 2016 that will be held on 19th May 2016 at UniKL Bandar Wawasan. Each category will be awarded a plaque, cash and a certificate. The categories of the awards are:
#1. IEEE SPS Malaysia Best PhD Thesis Award 2015
#2. IEEE SPS Malaysia Best Masters Thesis Award 2015
#3. IEEE SPS Malaysia Best Signal Processing Journal Paper Award 2015
 
Requirements
i. For categories #1 and #2, the thesis must have been accepted by a Malaysian institution of higher learning (IHL)’s Senate between 1st of January 2015 to 31st December 2015.
ii. For category #3, the paper must have been published (or at least have a DOI number) in a journal promoted by IEEE SPS (see Appendix A in the attachment) between 1st of January 2015 to 31st December 2015. The applicant has to be the corresponding author of the paper.
Award Criteria
For all categories, an expert committee will be evaluating the submission based on the originality and contribution of the works in the area of signal processing.
Submission Guidelines
The applicant must be an IEEE member at the time of submission.All applications must be submitted electronically via email to m.iqbal@ieee.org. Only complete
applications (including corresponding application form, thesis/paper and all outputs in one Zip file or PDF format) will be considered.
Submission Deadline: Before or on 15th February 2016
—————————————————————————————————-
____________________________________
Syed Abd. Rahman Al-Attas, Ph.D., SMIEEE
Computer Vision, Video, and Image Processing (CvviP) Research Lab

Dept. of Electronics and Computer Engineering,
Faculty of Electrical Engineering,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
81310 Skudai,
Johor,
MALAYSIA
 
Tel: 07-5535378
Fax: 07-5566272

Kelas Tafaquh Wanita 15 Januari 2016

Sukacita dimaklumkan bahawa program Tafaquh Wanita khusus untuk semua staf wanita UTM KL akan dijalankan seperti biasa seperti ketetapan berikut :

Tarikh            : 15 Januari 2016 (Jumaat)

Masa              : 1:00 – 2.15 petang

Tempat          : Bilik Seminar Shafie, Bangunan PSZ, UTM KL

Penceramah   : Ustazah Hidayah 

                       Pusat Pungutan Zakat Wilayah Persekutuan

Tajuk             : Fiqh Wanita

Anjuran          : Pusat Islam UTM KL

                       

                        Dengan segala hormatnya dijemput semua staf wanita dijemput menyertainya.Kerjasama semua juga amatlah diharapkan untuk sentiasa MENEPATI MASA. Semoga dengan kehadiran tersebut mendapat manfaat dan diberkati olehNya.

Sekian, terima kasih 

 
Siti Zaleha Mustapa
Pusat Islam UTM Kuala Lumpur
ext : 1606

EV DC Fast Charging standards

by  David Herron August 11, 2015

This article can be found here

Fast Charging makes electric cars more useful because of the reassurance drivers get knowing they can quickly recharge, and the faster effective trip speed.   It seems that car owners with fast-charge capable cars, with enough fast charging stations around them, feel capable of taking longer trips.

While fast charging is often unnecessary , because the optimum charging rate varies depending on the usage scenario the driver currently faces, it sure is convenient that fast charging stations give an almost complete recharge in under an hour.  Unlike cars with 6 kiloWatt level 2 charging systems (20-25 miles of range per hour of charging), fast charging’s faster charge rate (50 kiloWatts or more) can supply 100 or more miles of range per hour of charging.  A significant fast charging network available should make electric cars more attractive than otherwise, and lead to higher adoption rates.

In some cases it means electric car drivers can take real road trips — blowing up one of the negative electric car stereotypes.   (like being be limited to driving a short distance from your home)

Unfortunately, while fast charging electric cars were available in 2011 (Nissan Leaf, Mitsubishi i-MiEV), CHAdeMO charging infrastructure didn’t grow very fast.  Some automakers lobbied against CHAdeMO deployment because it wasn’t an SAE-blessed standard.  Instead the CHAdeMO was standard co-developed by TEPCO and the Japanese automakers.  Instead of adopting CHAdeMO, the SAE developed their own fast charging standard (Combo Charging System), Tesla Motors developed a proprietary fast charging system (Supercharger), and the Chinese developed a different fast charging standard.

The resulting effects were that

  • Fast charging adoption happened more slowly that it might have
  • Perhaps, Electric car adoption was delayed because of slow fast charging infrastructure build-out
  • As of 2015 there are three (or four) fast charging standards in various stages of adoption, causing a certain amount of pain to electric car drivers – we can’t just go to the closest fast charge station, we have to find the one that’s compatible with our car

What we have in 2015 is a multi-way electric car fast charging standards battle.  Consumers are caught in the middle not knowing which fast charging standard to support, not knowing enough to know how to choose between them.   Fortunately some of the automakers appear to be acting to soften the pain of incompatible fast charging standards by deploying multi-protocol fast charging stations.

What we deserve is ubiquitous fast charging stations with a unified fast charging protocol.  Our gasoline powered brethren have a unified standard for gasoline pump nozzles, we deserve the same for fast charging.

With multiple competing fast charging standards adapters would be a useful product, to enable fast charging from an otherwise incompatible charging station.  While Tesla Motors is selling a CHAdeMO-to-Tesla adapter, it seems such adapters might have limited popularity due to expense and deployment of dual-protocol charging stations.

Charging Level & Effective Trip Speed

Before we get into the fast charging standards, let’s do a small review of why this is important and some terminology.

DC Fast Charging is the fastest (highest powered) electric car charging system currently available.  The charging station provides a high power DC current, as much as 120 kiloWatts, to the car’s battery pack bypassing any other charging equipment in the car.

Some people call this “Level 3” because the normal-speed charging generally used (240 volt AC at about 30 amps) is popularly called “Level 2”.  Both names are incorrect.

SAE-EV-Charging-Levels

What’s popularly called “Level 2” is actually called “AC Level 2” and covers single phase AC charging at up to 20 kiloWatts in power.  In practice the highest rate currently supported by electric cars is about 10 kiloWatts, but the public charging network generally only supports 6 kiloWatts.

The DC Fast Charging we’re talking about is not “Level 3” but “DC Level 2” at power rates up to about 90 kiloWatts.

Where this becomes important is the recharge times noted in the chart.  The higher the charging power, the more quickly the car can be recharged.  Put another way, high power charging makes for a faster effective trip speed – because you gain more hours of range per hour of charging.  See Electric car charging rates, how fast, how slow, what we need, and why for more information.

  • 6 kiloWatts: 20-25 miles range per hour of charging (typical AC Level 2)
  • 50 kiloWatts: 120ish miles range per hour of charging  (CHAdeMO, CCS)
  • 120 kiloWatts: 300ish miles range per hour of charging (Tesla Supercharger)

Taking a road trip with an electric car would be much more pleasant with 300+ miles range per hour of charging than 20 miles of range.

DC Fast charging standards – CHAdeMO, CCS, Supercharger, China

iec-fast-charging-all-stanards

There are four or so DC Fast Charging systems currently being used by electric car manufacturers.  The picture shown here has four different connectors without even accounting for the Tesla Supercharger because there are two variants of the ComboChargingSystem charging socket.

 

At the current moment the leading car for each type is:

  • CHAdeMO – Nissan Leaf
  • CCS – BMW i3
  • Supercharger – Tesla Model S
  • China GB/T – ?

Let’s take a look at each.

CHAdeMO – (Nissan, Mitsubishi, Kia)

2011_nissan_leaf_n_42-web

CHAdeMO_Plug_VacavilleDavisStDC2

CHAdeMO Plug – Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CHAdeMO_Plug_VacavilleDavisStDC2.jpg

CHAdeMO is the trade name of a quick charging method for battery electric vehicles delivering up to 62.5 kW of high-voltage direct current via a special electrical connector. It is proposed as a global industry standard by an association of the same name.

It was defined by the CHAdeMO Association – Purpose/focus CHAdeMO Association aims to increase quick-charger installations worldwide and to standardize how to charge the vehicles. – http://chademo.com – CHAdeMO was formed by The Tokyo Electric Power Company, Nissan, Mitsubishi and Fuji Heavy Industries (the manufacturer of Subaru vehicles). Toyota later joined as its fifth executive member. CHAdeMO is an abbreviation of “CHArge de MOve”, equivalent to “charge for moving”. The name is a pun for “O cha demo ikaga desuka” in Japanese, translating to English as “How about some tea?”, referring to the time it would take to charge a car.

CHAdeMO is a form of DC Fast Charge, for high-voltage (up to 500 VDC) high-current (125 A) automotive fast charging via a JARI DC fast charge connector. The connector is specified by the JEVS (Japan Electric Vehicle Standard) G105-1993 from the Japan Automobile Research Institute. The connector includes two large pins for DC power, plus other pins to carry CAN-BUS connections.

Because CHAdeMO ports do not support AC charging, cars must have two charging ports – one for AC Level 2, the other for CHAdeMO.

AE Combo Charging System (CCS) – (BMW, GM, VW, and other carmakers)

050312-CombinedChargingSystem-web1

P7280018-620

When tasked with developing a fast charging system, the SAE J1772 committee basically took the existing J1772 plug and added on two large pins for high power DC.  The upper part is the ordinary J1772 plug used in the USA, and the lower portion are the two DC power pins.

Among the reasons the J1772 committee developed CCS are

  • Single charging inlet to support slow and fast charging (versus two required for CHAdeMO)
  • Use smart grid protocols to control charging
  • Same connector serves multiple purposes

The first point allows car makers more design freedom by requiring only a single hole in the skin of the car (or, a smaller hole) for recharging.  The charging cord is also lighter weight than the CHAdeMO, and easier to use.

The second point – see the image above labeled “IEC DC Charging Systems” – has to do with the control protocol between the car and the charging station.  We’ll discuss this below, but CCS uses PLC for that communication, whereas CHAdeMO uses CAN.  CAN is a data protocol used between components inside cars, while PLC is part of the smart grid protocols.

Tesla Supercharger

  • The Tesla mobile charging unit comes with adapters for every kind of power outlet, from 120 volt 12 amp (NEMA 5-20), through to 240 volt 50 amp (NEMA 14-50).
  • Via an adapter, it can connect to J1772 charging stations
  • At a Supercharger station (pictured above) it can receive DC fast charging at up to a 120 kiloWatt rate

It means a Tesla Model S or Model X owner can get rapid charging in a wide range of situations.

Tesla Motors also sells an add-on adapter allowing a Model S/X owner to recharge at a CHAdeMO station.  Tesla Motors does not sell any kind of adapter allowing owners of CHAdeMO or CCS cars to recharge at a Supercharger station, however.