Grab our RSS Feed
Volt Nation VIDEO: Public Q and A Part III (Final)
March 26th, 2008 | Posted in: Volt Nation Video
In this final segment of the Volt Nation Q&A, Volt/E-Flex vehicle line executive Frank Weber tells us that the onboard charger, which takes the current from an electric outlet has smart charging capabilities and is able to receive either 110 V or 220 V input. He also mentions that GM has plans under development with utility companies to see about possible V2G applications.
Engineer Tony Posawatz talks about how GM might use OnStar to monitor small fleets of presumably early version Volts to “help solve problems during development” He also mentions the car could send drivers emails so called “green-mails” to tell the driver about energy consumption and fuels saved.
Chevrolet general manager Ed Peper admits that is our word-of-mouth effort, and the work here at GM-Volt.com which will go a long way to help spread the word about the car and increase its eventual sales. He also said GM plans to keep us in the loop in the car’s development as that will help spread the word too.
Popularity: 4%
(3 votes, average: 5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
Posted by: Lyle
42 Responses to “Volt Nation VIDEO: Public Q and A Part III (Final)”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- Volt Battery Supplier Chosen and GM Comments on Production Photo Leaks (POLL)
- BREAKING: Production VOLT Spied!! The REAL DEAL!!
- Chevy Volt Interior Picture Leak
- Bob Lutz Responds to Toyota’s Announcement: Large Volt Test Fleet in 2009
- Volt Competition: Mazda’s Secret E-REV Program, Toyota Forwards Plug-in Fleet to 2009
- Bob Lutz on Chevy Volt Battery Tests, Cold Starts, and Use of OnStar
- The Chevy Volt Generator Will Run at One of Several Fixed RPMs
- E-Flex Cadillac Next?
- How the Chevy Volt Operates Past the Customer Depletion Point
- The Chevy Volt Will Have iPod Connectivity (Plus More Design Issues)
Designed and Developed by Twenty Six Media
March 26th, 2008 at 12:26 am
Once again, Lyle, thanks for your tireless, dedicated & inspired efforts in providing us with gm-volt.com and in hosting VoltNation! This footage is an excellent video "wrap" to the history-making inaugural VoltNation Town Hall meeting last week! In retrospect, I feel very fortunate to have had a chance to attend (despite the slight sacrifice in briefly trading my balmy Florida sunshine for NYC’s blustery, "hurricane gulch" weather on March 19). ;)
March 26th, 2008 at 2:56 am
Lyle,
Thank you for GM-Volt.com.
Its is a vehicle for us all to express our aspirations and concerns.
I think GM management and engineers share the aspirations and we are only debating the detail.
Excellent!
March 26th, 2008 at 5:35 am
Lyle, it was obvious that you are respected with GM. It is also obvious they are feeding of the enthusium of this site. Great questions.
Did any one ask when the Volt would be classed as a Pre Production vehicle?
March 26th, 2008 at 5:46 am
Thanks Lyle.
GM’s use of OnStar to monitor small fleets of presumably early version Volts to “help solve problems during development” is probably a good move on their part.
Sending so called “green-mails” to tell the driver about energy consumption, fuel saved, etc. is a different matter IF the means to accomplish that is via OnStar and "green-mails" is a substitute for in-car displays.
All the information that is needed for "green-mails" is already in the car. I really want/need to seen that information real time, not after the fact. Further, I may or may not want to subscribe to OnStar/"green-mail" service; it all depends upon the monthly cost.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:57 am
Frank Weber is quoted as saying "the onboard charger, which takes the current from an electric outlet has smart charging capabilities and is able to receive either 110 V or 220 V input."
What does that really mean? Will the Volt have a single receptacle capable of receiving either a 110v or 220v input? Or, does it mean their will be both a 110v and a 220v receptacle.
If it is the former, I find that curious. Normal household wiring has different size/shape receptacles for 110v and 220v circuits. The size of the wiring is different for 110v and 220v circuits.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:00 am
Oops, sorry about the grammer! I meant to say…Or, does it mean there will be both a 110v and 220v receptacle.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:59 am
#5 Estero
You asked a good question regarding 110/220: "What does that really mean? Will the Volt have a single receptacle capable of receiving either a 110v or 220v input? Or, does it mean their will be both a 110v and a 220v receptacle."
I listened again to the video with your comment in mind. It may mean (only) that there will be a European and a US version of the car, and that the same charger device (box inside the vehicle) can accomodate either US 110 outlets or Euro 220 outlets (maybe in multiple versions). FW did not actually say that the same vehicle would have 110 or 220 connections to the outside world. I hope that it will, but he didn’t go that far.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:04 am
Lyle:
You did a great job with this.
Now we just have to wait to see what GM does to deliver this vehicle!
The next 30+ months are going to be interesting, that is for sure….
March 26th, 2008 at 7:12 am
There was a question about whether the vehicle could supply power to a house for emergency use, say for a refrigerator. The response got off into the "power grid," making me think that Weber never understood the question. For many of us that backup capability could be, all by itself, a very strong reason to buy the car — to have a powerful but mobile backup generator for our water pump, heater blower, and refrigerator.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Re: 110v and 220v charging
Correct me if I’m wrong but wouldn’t it be cheaper to recharge the battery at 220v vs. 110v? And possibly quicker? Also with evential V2G capability… wouldn’t it be better to do this at 220v?
March 26th, 2008 at 7:47 am
The vehicle to grid capability is something I would actively avoid. I don’t want my cars battery to be used to power the grid.
Yes I understand how all of the V2G is suppose to work and that I could actually make money off of the concept.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:52 am
mmcc@10,
It won’t necessarily be implicitly cheaper to recharge the battery at 220 vs. 110, but it should be quicker. Indirectly, a higher voltage should equate to less power loss from the fuse box to the charger, so in that sense it would be slightly more efficient getting the power to the Volt.
Whether or not it is more efficient overall, however, will depend on the implementation method used for the smart charger, and which power method it is optimized for.
I think a major reason for not sticking with only 220, would be that most people (including myself) likely have 110 service already available in their garage. The benefits of one voltage over the other electrically is likely in the noise compared with the amount of power the Volt will require to charge back up. Should certainly charge faster though with 220 if their implementation is intelligent enough to utilize that higher voltage.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:59 am
The discussion after the video will make more sense.
I don’t know what kind of receptacle the Volt will have, but it will know if it is plugged into a 110v or 220v. In other words, wire your garage the way you want to. The car will accept both. If I buy it, I will charge with 220v at home and charge with 110v while at work.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:09 am
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT: A new forum thread is now available to everyone to RANK the top 10, 15, 20 or so questions not yet answered (or not fully answered) by GM at VoltNation or elsewhere. Go to http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1042&posted=1#post1042 to rank these questions I’m calling the "Lutz List" from most important to least important. The deadline is Wed, April 2 ….1 week from today.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Sorry, guys, my IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT above has the wrong link. Use the following instead…..
http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=175
March 26th, 2008 at 9:28 am
These guys are taking a very wise, holistic approach to this product, looking at all aspects comprehensively, engaging the right partners in all related industries. No doubt they will put Volts in the hands of utilities, so that they may evaluate how the vehicle may serve V2G needs in the future.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I don’t understand why people seem to think that the 110/220 capability within the same receptacle is such "star wars" technology. I’ve got devices as small as a tiny Li-ion CR123 charger than can plug directly into 110 or 220 with just an adapter(if you’re in Europe) , no transformer.
March 26th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Regarding charging connections, I seem to remember that the EV1 used a paddle for induction charging. It was a safety feature.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Reviewing the Nasaman list it does not include any question about if the Volt will have a transmission and if so more details about it. Agree that you do not want to add to your list or it will get out of control. Just wondering did anyone at Volt Nation ask about a transmission for the Volt, or will it just have a forward and reverse.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Maybe two extension cards? The recepticle for 220 is different than 110 in the USA. The plug that goes into this is not the part that goes into the car. (think about it) I would guess that IF the your car has the capability for both then there would be one cord for 110 and another for 220, otherwise you would not have the capability for both since you can’t physically plug in a 110 cord into a 220 outlet.
Question is the CAR is smart enough to know but will we be given both options via two different cords.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:19 am
As an electrical engineer and without going into the math, it would be cheaper to charge at 220V. How much cheaper would depend on your charging habbits but it would be a good idea to spend $100 and have an electrician instal a 220V outlet in your garage for you. Or take 10 mintues and $20and do it yourself.
On
Also, designing a charger that accepts 110/220 VAC is fairly simple. Virtually every cell phone and laptop has one. The only changes in the charger that GM would need to make to have 1 world compatible charger would be plug shape (you can buy a universal adapter for $20 so I see no issue) and compensating for input frequency differences (US, Japan=60Hz; Europe=50Hz; some parts of Africa=40Hz)
March 26th, 2008 at 10:30 am
Frankly, the whole charger is probably the easiest part of the car. I do the power electronics there being that difficult. I believe GM feels this way from the attitute they are giving. Even the AC motor should not be a big deal. I bet they are using permanent magnet synchronous motors (just like most wind turbines). They are real expensive but will have a super long life span because of the brushless design.
In all honesty, the two major issues are control software and batteries.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:15 am
This is why GM should NOT choose one battery supplier: Fire at battery plant threatens global supply of exploding laptop batteries
The fallout of the March 3rd fire at LG Chem, the second biggest S. Korean manufacturer of laptop batteries, is now clear. There’s a global shortage of batteries which won’t be relieved until LG Chem can restart the assembly lines in another 2 to 3 months.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/fire-at-battery-plant-threatens-global-supply-of-exploding-lapto/
March 26th, 2008 at 11:24 am
SteveF #19:
I seem to remember reading that there would be no transmission in this car. I will try to find that information and post it here later.
March 26th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Technically, I don’t think a transmission is needed but having something like a CVT will ensure that everything is operating at optimal levels at all times. Weight doesn’t effect this type of car as much as a gas powered one so the extra range that the CVT might give should outweight a few hundered extra pounds.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
#19 SteveF
Although I cannot confirm this, I don’t believe there is no need for a transmission in the Volt. The electric drive motor will operate at a variable speed over the entire operating range of the vehicle. For reverse, the motor would run backwards.
Per Ksuhwail, # 22, "I bet they are using permanent magnet synchronous motors (just like most wind turbines). They are real expensive but will have a super long life span because of the brushless design."
Since synchronous motors operate at the speed of the input frequency, the control would require a variable frequency drive. I believe the EV-1 had a similar arrangement.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
19 SteveF, 24 Jim I, et al…..
A transmission was not asked about, as I can recall, at VoltNation. But I can assure everyone here the Volt will NOT have a CVT or convention transmission, based on the following:
1) The Volt’s 0-60 times of 7-9 secs (GM guys in NYC put those limits on it) with a 160HP electric motor would be MUCH faster –at least 4-6 secs if they used a transmission —in fact, improved 0-60 times (without compromising top speed) would really be the ONLY reason (IMO) for using a transmission*
2) An electric motor generates vastly more torque than an ICE of the same horsepower, so any kind of gear train has to be extremely rugged (read "expensive") [Tesla has a messy, costly situation requiring all of its early production cars to be retrofitted with a much beefier transmission ---the earlier ones failed due to the high torque]
3) It would be cheaper & more reliable to switch the Volt’s motor windings between a high-acceleration mode & a high power/rpm mode to obtain the effect of a transmission than to actually use a mechanical transmission —who knows, GM might do this in a later model
*From what I’ve read on Tesla’s site, they use a transmission only to get the acceleration AND top speed of an exotic, high-performance car —the GM Volt is not meant to be a ZR-1! BTW, diesel locomotive designers tried to use a transmission to drive the wheels 60+ years ago —they gave up & used electric motors instead because the best transmissions they could come up with failed repeatedly!
March 26th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Ksuhwail #25 I think you have got it backwards. Weight is very important in this car not so important in an ICE car. More weight = more energy to move said weight=less range. When this site first started there were many threads about design of body to reduce weight including composites and nano fibers etc. Might want to go back & read up.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
If you still don’t concur try this F=MA the more mass you have the greater the force required to move it. Force in an electric car comes from the electric motors which derive their energy from the batteries.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
#28:
Weight is important, but we were also told that the areodynamics were more important than the weight….
I would also imagine that the rolling resistance of the tires is also going to end up being a big deal!
March 26th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Here is a fascinating and informative look at new EV conversions using A123 batteries and siemens motors & controllers. http://www.evdrive.com/ From BMW to Dirt Bike, there is some very good info here and since it’s A123 batteries, Volt enthusiasts can learn something here.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
All you tech types (yea, you nasaman) may want to go here if you want to learn more about EVs so that you can ask questions of GM: http://www.metricmind.com/ It will be well worth your time!
March 26th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
>> Volt will NOT have a CVT or convention transmission
When referring to "CVT", it is best to indicate type. In this case, "Cone & Belt" is implied.
Hybrids like Prius don’t either. The PSD is essentially just a differential, hence the type of "Planetary".
March 26th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
#26 nasaman.
Good information and good explanation of the transmission issue. Thanks!
March 27th, 2008 at 8:14 am
There is no such thing as 110/220 in the US anymore(mostly)- it is more correctly 120/240VAC.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
My thoughts on the weight issue are that since the power dynamics of electric drive are different than an ICE (Peak torque at 0 rpm etc) it would be easier to get the car moving. But to ensure major power drain doesn’t happen at higher speeds, aerodynamics would be critical. Weight will always be an issue no matter what type of propulsion is used. I’m sure they could make the Volt weigh less than 1000lbs but at what cost? 250k? 500k?
I’m just saying that aerodynamics just might be slightly more of a priority especially since it is much cheaper to implement good aerodynamics as opposed to high tech alloys and carbon fiber to get maximum range at the lowest price.
I believe that GM has been putting this idea out there because aerodynamics require more engineering/wind tunnel time while wight savings is simpler to implement.
Thus, the "We need more time to get the design right but don’t worry since we will have it done by target" type of rhetoric from Lutz.
March 27th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
I thought there was mention of wheel motors at one time. Lyle thanks for all the good information. Love your site. I really liked the question about "EV only" option. Cannot wait. I get more excited by the day. TED
March 27th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Not many people are asking WHY weight matters less for the Volt. The answer boils down to something very plain and simple: regenerative braking. The more massive the car, the more energy you get from bringing it to a stop. But this only addresses efficiency, i.e., "MPG." Additional weight means worse handling, and, in general, heavier-duty (and more expensive) supporting components all around, e.g., suspension, motor, frame, tires, friction brakes, etc.
March 27th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Weight does matter quite a bit in getting the vehicle started from a dead stop, and climbing hills. Both of those draw more juice from the batt. Once the weight is moving it takes less to keep it moving, but this is not true of aero whose drag is continuous or increases with speed.
March 27th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
38Tom….
You’re right —regenerative braking helps recapture the kinetic energy a car acquires (energy the drive train expends) during acceleration. And regenerative deceleration does the same thing. Drive train designers are keenly aware that drivers don’t like the feeling of "free wheeling" (feeling they’re losing a degree of control if a car coasts freely when lifting the accelerator foot). This is why automatic transmissions downshift (and drivers often manually downshift) when decelerating.
In a well-designed electric drive train the drive motor that’s driven by the battery doubles as a generator that’s loaded by the battery when decelerating —with the net result that even deceleration without braking recovers much of the vehicle’s kinetic energy. This is why even larger EVs such as the plug-in Saturn Vue CUV can be heavier than comparable ICE-powered cars (which have no energy recovery) and still realize high overall efficiency gains vs conventional drive trains.
One more thing —added weight, if properly located, can actually improve handling. The Volt’s (& plug-in Vue’s) heavy batteries are centered & located very LOW in the vehicle, which improves handling due to the lowered center of gravity —my Camaro Z-28 (the one used in IROC racing) was virtually impossible to roll over, while as we all know, a Ford Explorer will roll over as easily as Rover when you say "roll over, Rover".
March 27th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
So glad to hear that they are not demanding some obscure paddle type charger. Being able to plug into 110 v outlets adds opportunities to charge. Due to the obscene number of varieties of 220 outlets, you’ll need a basket full of adapters. Stove and dryer (3 wire and 4 wire varieties of each), RV, welder and who knows what else. At least you don’t need to find a "charging station" with some weird inductance charger.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Hi,
I had a question about charging the vehicle.
Does the car plug into the wall, or does the house (via extension) plug into the car?
If the answer is the former, how long is the vehicle’s extension?
Thanks,
Bill W.