EML4930: Senior Design II

Electric Motorcycle - Final Report

December 10th, 2010

Mike Franck
Michael Grgas
Ryan Thor
 Table of Contents

Introduction ...................................................................................................... 2
Project Goals ..................................................................................................... 2
Background ....................................................................................................... 3
Project Scope..................................................................................................... 4
Product Specifications ....................................................................................... 5
Concept Generation and Analysis ..................................................................... 6
Concept Selection ............................................................................................. 14
Decision Matrix ................................................................................................. 15
Modeling and Analysis ...................................................................................... 16
Cost Analysis...................................................................................................... 20
Machining/Manufacturing and Assembly ......................................................... 22
Operator’s Manual ............................................................................................ 29
Testing and Data Analysis ................................................................................. 37
Environmental Concerns ................................................................................... 44
Website ............................................................................................................. 46
Results Discussion and Conclusion.................................................................... 47
Works Cited ....................................................................................................... 49
Appendix A – Part Drawings .............................................................................. 50

1
Introduction

In the United States alone, nearly twenty tons of carbon dioxide from motor vehicles is emitted per
capita every year. Coupled with the ever-growing number of vehicles on the road in this country, the
rapid development of once third-world countries is leading to a tipping point in emissions control.
Sweeping changes must be made to curb harmful greenhouse gas emissions and man’s dependence on
fossil fuels. The popularity of electric vehicles is now at a century high due to the rising cost of gasoline,
as well as increased environmental awareness by the general public. They offer a drastic reduction in
overall energy consumption and subsequent emissions as opposed to traditional internal combustion
engine propulsion. Opposed to four-wheeled vehicles, some of the benefits of two-wheeled electric
transportation are: the motorcycle displaces far less frontal area and has a smaller contact patch with
the pavement than a car, this results in a lower overall parasitic drag; motorcycles are lighter than
automobiles, and therefore require less stored energy; lastly, they are of simpler design as well –
requiring no HVAC, in-car entertainment, or any of the myriad of accessories found in modern cars. For
relatively low-range applications, they are a viable alternative to their internal combustion engine
counterparts. The following details the design and construction of the team’s electric motorcycle.

Project Goals

The main objective of this project is to produce a low budget, efficient means of two wheeled
transportation. Three primary goals were set for the project, they are: produce a vehicle that can be
driven a minimum 5 miles, reach a top speed of at least 25 miles per hour and recharge in less than eight
hours. Upon successful completion of the primary goals, secondary objectives include the installation of
adequate lighting, weatherproofing of the components, design and incorporation of protective fairings,
followed by sand blasting and powder coating to stave off oxidation of the components. These
secondary goals will ensure the team delivers a final product that can be operated safely in city traffic.

At the onset of the project, the team had in their possession a small, 50cc Yamaha dirt bike with which
the first semester’s design was based around. Between the first and second semester’s, a larger
Kawasaki chassis was donated to the team and the project was redesigned around it.

Various forms of analysis were performed – the team took into account theories from Dynamic System's
II when calculating the necessary power the vehicle would need. Gear design theory was implemented
from Mechanical Systems II. From The Finite Element Method, ProEngineer Mechanica’s modeling

2
software was utilized to quantify the loads placed on the chassis as well as modeling the heat transfer in
various components. The program was very helpful in determining if any strengthening of the frame
would be necessary; it also reduced the time that would have been spent on numerical analysis.

The team chose a 48 volt battery system powering a brushed DC motor capable of delivering up to 15
horsepower. For motor control, a popular unit was chosen based on its numerous power control
capabilities and familiar software. Charging is handled by a 48 volt, continuous amperage charger.
Semester I theoretical calculations yielded an ideal range of 39 miles (at 25 mph), a maximum speed of
48 mph, as well as recharge time of 3 hours. Theoretical calculations closely matched testing results.

Background

Carbon emissions have come under great scrutiny as a major contributing factor of climate change. The
development of fully electric vehicles (EV’s) is one proposed solution that offers hope of reducing the
large amount of harmful emissions from standard ICE powered vehicles. Electric vehicles can also foster
a new attitude for the advancement of our culture within the restraints of our environment and level of
comfort.

Electric vehicles are propelled by either a DC or AC electric motor that draws its power from chemical
energy stored in a battery pack. These motors are capable of converting the energy from the batteries
into motion with very high efficiencies of typically 80-90%. This affords the electric vehicle the
advantage of potentially doing the same amount of work while using less energy, when compared to the
conventional IC vehicle that is typically only about 40% efficient at converting chemical energy from
gasoline into mechanical motion. Electric vehicles can drastically lower pollution caused by the
emissions from the vehicle in the transportation sector. Its disadvantages can be attributed to
performance and cost. The main hurdle that EV's face is the task of efficiently storing the energy
required to meet the average driver’s performance needs, i.e. battery size and storage capacity. There
exists a delicate balance between an efficient EV and one that is not. Vehicle weight is that dominant
limiting factor. An efficient aerodynamic vehicle profile and a low coefficient of rolling resistance can be
achieved with relative ease. A battery pack and chassis that marries a long vehicle range and relative
light weight is much more difficult to achieve. Though advances have been made in the production of
smaller, lightweight batteries (lithium-ion), their high cost limits their use in many applications. Often,
cheaper lead-acid batteries are implemented, but their greater weight and lower energy density will
drastically reduce driving range.

3
The effects of a heavy battery pack can be countered by a reduction in vehicle size. By reducing the size
of the vehicle, energy requirements drop dramatically. A low aerodynamic profile, lightweight chassis
and low rolling resistance from thin tires will result in improved performance. These trade-offs render a
motorcycle a prime candidate for an EV application.

Project Scope

i. Problem Statement
Produce a working electrically driven motorcycle. The vehicle must achieve a top speed of twenty-five
miles per hour, travel a distance of five miles before recharging, and recharge its batteries in less than
eight hours.

ii. Justification
A donated 1994 Kawasaki EX250 motorcycle originally powered by an IC engine will serve as the chassis
which the components will be designed around. The re-engineered vehicle will be a viable means of
transportation for short range travel. Three current production electric motorcycles will be used as
benchmarks for the project, each represents a different level of performance. In order to complete the
project effectively and below budget, a full understanding of current electric vehicle propulsion systems
must be attained. An electric drive system consisting of a: DC permanent magnet motor, motor speed
controller, battery pack and battery charger are necessary for the project to be deemed complete. The
bike also has secondary needs that will greatly increase reliability, safety and ride quality.

iii. Methodology
Through a collaborative effort, the group brainstormed ideas and analyzed them, selected the best
choice through quantitative methods, designed, and finally built the motorcycle. Weekly meetings were
held to ensure that the design and build stayed on schedule.

iv. Constraints
The most prominent limiting factor of the project is available budget. The team raised some outside
funding with the goal of purchasing a Lithium-ion based battery pack. Unfortunately, not enough money
was raised, so the team put the new available funding towards better instrumentation.

v. Expected Results
For the project to be deemed a success upon completion, three main criteria must be met.

4
 1. The motorcycle must be able to attain a speed of twenty-five miles per hour.
2. Travel five miles before needing to be recharged. The motorcycle was never tested for range in
its previous form.
3. It must recharge from a drained state to full power in less than eight hours.

Product Specifications
Based on theoretical calculations, values were determined for the amount of power that would be
required for the team to meet the goals of 25 mph and a range of 5 miles. Initially, a two horsepower,
3500 RPM electric motor would have achieved the team’s 25 mph goal. Although capable of achieving
the desired minimum top speed, this small power plant would have taken approximately 18 seconds to
accelerate to 25 mph. The team reassessed the needs of the customer and determined a larger motor
was necessary to provide a more enjoyable driving experience.

The motor selection was changed to a more powerful brushed, permanent magnet, DC electric motor
manufactured by Mars Electric. The ME0708 Etek-R is capable of outputting 8 horsepower continuously
and 15 peak horsepower. At 30 lbs, it has the highest power to weight ratio of any brushed PM motor
on the market, making it ideal for the application of electric vehicles.

A motor controller is required to control the voltage and current flow from the batteries to the motor,
therefore regulating speed and acceleration. The controller that was selected for the electric motorcycle
build is the AXE series motor controller from Alltrax. This controller is designed for a battery voltage of
48 volts with a maximum current output of 650 amps. Software is provided that allows the team to
change various desired outputs.

For the motorcycle’s power supply, four high performance 12 volt 44 A-Hr sealed lead acid batteries
were selected to be connected in series for the selected 48V. The batteries are designed for high power
multiple cycle usage. A 48 volt 15 amp onboard charger was selected to charge the SLA battery packs.
The charger is weather and vibration resistant and plugs into a 110 volt household power outlet.

5
Concept Generation and Analysis – Semester I

At the onset of the first semester, the team based its analysis around the now discarded Yamaha
chassis. The following represents early concept generation. Though the fixtures the team used for the
components would change after the larger chassis was acquired, the overall selection of them stayed
the same.

Concept A

Ideally, the motorcycle frame would be large enough to house the components necessary to have a
functioning electric motorcycle. Concept A reflects one possible configuration where the motor is affixed
to a motor-mount on the center brace of the cage. Four 48 volt, 36 amp-hour lead acid batteries are
secured to the front beam, open to the air to allow for ventilation. In order to maintain a low center of
gravity, the batteries are positioned close to the motor without causing interference. The motor
controller and the charger are bolted to the center divide on either side of the frame

Figure 1: Lead-acid Battery Configuration 1

Analysis

Cost
A larger, replacement frame and chassis will add approximately 20-40 pounds of weight to the

6
motorcycle. Though heavier and more expensive, a larger frame will allow for a more comfortable ride
and better storage of the power and drive systems.

Performance
The added weight would cause the performance of the bike to suffer. In addition to weight the larger
frame would mean a greater frontal area, increasing air resistance on the vehicle and rider. These added
variables would decrease the range of the motorcycle.

Comfort
Incorporating the drive components will be easier with a larger frame, as it affords more flexibility in
positioning and rearranging certain components to suit the rider. The rider will be more comfortable as
well.

7
Concept B

The following concept utilizes the existing frame and chassis. Four: 12 V, 35 A-hr sealed lead acid
batteries will be connected in series to make a 48 V, 1.68 kW battery stack. An Etek-R, brushed
permanent magnet electric motor will be used. It is capable of producing 15 peak horsepower and will
easily aid the team in reaching the design specifications. An Alltrax, 48 V, 300 Amp motor controller is
ideally suited for the Etek-r. A Soneil, 6 Amp, continuous amperage charger will charge the battery stack
from a fully drained state in under six hours.

Figure 2: Lead-acid Battery Configuration 1

Cost
This design is the least expensive of the four. The existing frame is utilized in addition to the least
expensive battery option.

Performance
Concepts B is lighter than Concept A, but leads to a highly uncomfortable ride. The smaller frontal area
of Concept B will also reduce aerodynamic resistance on the vehicle and rider. The largest gains come

8
from the lighter lithium polymer battery pack discussed in Concept D. Its drastically reduced weight and
higher power delivery make it the most desirable option.

Comfort
The battery charger and motor controller are placed beneath the rider’s seat, this will raise the rider by
approximately four inches. As a result, this will decrease the rider’s comfort level.

9
Concept C

Like Concept B, concept C features four: 12 volt, 35 amp-hour lead-acid batteries. Placed in battery trays
on the frame, two batteries will be placed over the rear tire. This idea was inspired by the saddle bags
found on a standard ICE motorcycle. The second two batteries will be placed behind the suspension
forks between of the riders knees. Motor and motor mount placement is the same for both lead-acid
configurations B and C. The charger and motor controller are to be mounted in a box inside of the
motorcycle’s seat. The charger is to be placed furthest back facing the rear so as to maximize
accessibility.

Figure 3: Lead-acid Battery Configuration 2

Analysis

Cost
This configuration is to be used as an option if supplementary funding is not received for the purchase of
a larger frame and a more efficient battery stack. Expenses will be similar if not equal to those in
Concept B because all components are the same with different mounting locations.

10
Performance
Weight is equal to Concept B. Due to the front batteries being mounted higher on the frame, the bike’s
center of gravity will be raised and consequently its handling will suffer.

Comfort
Due to the increased seat height from the charger and controller box, a hard seat should be used as to
not further raise the height of the rider. Depending on how long the rider’s legs are, the two front
batteries may impede leg room.

11
Concept D

Concept D is drastically different from the three previous designs, it incorporates the lightest and most
powerful components for the motorcycle. It is also the most expensive concept. The battery pack will
consist of a lithium-ion based power source. At equal voltage and amperage, these batteries are
approximately half the weight of the sealed lead-acid pack.

Figure 4: Lithium Polymer battery configuration, larger frame

Cost
The Li-ion batteries proposed in this concept are approximately twice the cost of a similar lead-acid
battery. Li-ion batteries also require a proper means of managing the voltages and amperages within the
pack while charging. A battery management system, coupled with a more expensive charger, make this
option unattainable without a large influx of funding.

Performance
It is impossible to determine the overall weight of this concept due to the unknown weight of the larger
frame, but the team estimates a 20-40 lb increase over the smaller frame. The lighter and lower placed
Li-ion batteries will lower the center of gravity which will aid in vehicle handling.

12
Comfort
The larger frame should be much more comfortable to operate. The lighter weight of the battery pack
will also add to the ease of operation of the vehicle.

13
Concept Selection

The decision matrix below supports the group’s intuition that Concept D is the more desirable design. It
will exceed the customer’s needs and performance requirements. Unfortunately, this design is only
possible at a high cost premium. The cost of the lithium-ion battery pack alone exceeds the group’s
current budget. With this in mind the second best option, Concept B will achieve the projects goals.
Throughout the semester, the team redesigned Concept B. Improvements were as follows: redesigned
battery fixtures utilize lighter mounting components, a heat sink was added below the charger and
controller to aid in component cooling and a stronger motor mount was designed to better fix the motor
to the frame.

Until the team acquired the larger frame, the design process was based around Concept B.

Figure 5: Semester I Final Design Profile

14
 Figure 6: Semester I Final Design Side View

Decision Matrix

A B C D

Specification Rating Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted

Specifications Rating Rating Rating
Weight (1-5) score score score score

Configurability 22% 4.0 0.9 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.2 4.0 0.9

Weight 33% 1.0 0.3 2.0 0.7 2.0 0.7 4.0 1.3

Cost 11% 2.0 0.2 4.0 0.4 4.0 0.4 1.0 0.1

Comfort 22% 4.0 0.9 3.0 0.7 2.0 0.4 4.0 0.9

Availability 11% 1.0 0.1 5.0 0.6 5.0 0.6 1.0 0.1

Score 2.44 2.56 2.33 3.33

selection No Yes No Yes*

15
3-D Modeling and Analysis

ProEngineer Wildfire & Solidworks 2008-09

Below is a model of the original vehicle frame. ProEngineer’s Mechanica was used to analyze the
various loads on the frame. This was carried out due to concerns over excess weight from the battery
pack that may have endangered the frame’s structural rigidity. The team analyzed loading from the
forward and rear battery packs, as well as those from the rider.

Figure 7: Vehicle Frame

The frame is a welded chro-moly steel unit with a wall thickness of 0.125 inches; the chro-moly has a
max yield stress of 52 kpsi. The frame was dissected into its major components so as to simplify
Mechanica’s analysis. The following analyzes the forward battery box section of the frame. A distributed
load of 52 pounds was placed on the frame down pipe, while the part was constrained at the front fork
and accompanying frame connections. Max component yielding was 1.56 kpsi, well below the material’s
limit.

16
 Figure 8: Forward frame subassembly

The rear frame subassembly would undergo not only a load from the rider, but also an additional load
from the rear battery pack. The weight of the motor controller and original charger were disregarded as
they were minimal in comparison to the rider and batteries. Accounting for a 170 lb rider and 52 lb
battery pack, a distributed load was put into Mechanica. Max component yielding was found to be 4.137
kpsi, below the material’s limit.

Figure 9: Rear frame subassembly

17
Semester II
Finite Element Analysis of the frame was not performed in the second semester of the project. The
larger Kawasaki frame utilizes chromoly steel tubing with the same diameter and wall thickness as the
original Yamaha frame. Strengthening the team’s decision to forego a second FEM analysis is the fact
that the original loads placed on the frame only resulted in minimal yields within the chassis. The highest
yielding of ~4 kpsi is minute compared to the stress limit of the material (52 kpsi).The team did analyze
the heat transfer within the motor controller heat sink.

Heat Sink FEM

Due to high heat generated in the motor controller, the manufacturer recommends using a 0.375 in.
thick and 144 in2 aluminum plate heat sink. It was decided that a heat sink of this size would be difficult
to mount y inside the motorcycle frame. A thin finned aluminum heat sink was therefore selected in
order to reduce the overall footprint. The below figure represents the finned heat sink that was
selected.

The finite element analysis method was used to size an efficient heat sink for the purpose of reducing
heat generation within the motor controller. Because the length to width ratio is so large, a simplified
2D model was used for analysis. Based on field testing of temperatures generated at high loads within

18
the controller, a base temperature of 120 degrees Fahrenheit was chosen. The heat sink was modeled
with a fluid velocity of 25 miles per hour and an ambient temperature of 75 degrees Fahrenheit.

Theoretical analysis yielded efficient transfer of heat via forced convection with ambient air acting as
the working fluid. The controller temperature is effectively reduced from 120 degrees to near ambient
temperatures. These calculations were confirmed using real time temperature data from the controller
software. A maximum of 75 degrees Fahrenheit was recorded during testing.

19
Cost Analysis

The following 3 tables represent a cost comparison of component configurations for three designs
developed by the team. The components in the third chart were selected. A limited budget did not allow
the team to pursue higher performance battery storage options.

Lithium Iron Phosphate Battery Pack (90Ah)

Component Type Model Quantity Cost/unit Total
Batteries LiFePO4 Thunder Sky LPF90AH 15 $135.00 $2,025.00
Motor Brushed PM DC Etek-R 1 $419.50 $419.50
Controller 650 Watt Alltrax AXE4865 1 $559.50 $559.50
Charger 48V 16A Zivan NG-1 1 $550.00 $550.00
BMS* 77V 500A BMS-LF-24 1 $799.00 $799.00
$4,353.00
Lithium Iron Phosphate Battery Pack (40Ah)
Component Type Model Quantity Cost/unit Total
Batteries LiFePO4 Thunder Sky LPF40AH 15 $60.00 $900.00
Motor Brushed PM DC Etek-R 1 $419.50 $419.50
Controller 650 Watt Alltrax AXE4865 1 $559.50 $559.50
Charger 48V 16A Zivan NG-1 1 $550.00 $550.00
BMS* 77V 500A BMS-LF-24 1 $799.00 $799.00
$3,228.00
SLA Battery Pack
Component Type Model Quantity Cost/unit Total
Batteries SLA EVP44-12 4 $117.39 $469.56
Motor Brushed PM DC Etek-R 1 $419.50 $419.50
Controller 650 Watt Alltrax AXE4865 1 $559.50 $559.50
Charger 48V 15A SLA OB48/15 On Board 1 $326.88 $326.88
1775.44
* BMS: Battery Management System - Required for LiFePO4 battery packs, not
required for SLA.

20
Budget

Item Vendor Description Quantity Price + S&H

Pinion McMaster-Carr 14 Tooth for 520 Chain 1 15.79

DC Motor Electric Motorsport Brushed, Perm Mag DC 1 419.5

Alltrax Controller Electric Motorsport Speed Controller 1 559.5

48V, 44Ah Batteries Electric Motorsport SLA AGM Batteries 4 469.5

Bear Contactor Electric Motorsport Switching Solenoid 1 51.5

Charger Charging Chargers 48V/15A SLA AGM 1 326.88

1/0 Gauge Wire Evolve Electrics 1/0 Gauge, 15 Ft 1 36.3

Terminal Lugs McMaster-Carr Wire Connectors 17 16.15

DC/DC Converter Thunderstruck Mo. Converts Pack V to acc 1 25.00

Cycle Analyst Grin Cyclery Onboard Data Logger 1 150.00

Battery Meter McMaster-Carr Battery Monitor 1 100.00

Vehicle Lighting Various HL, TL, Indicators 1 53.14

Total: 2223.26

Budget: 2300

Remaining
Funds 76.74

21
Machining/Manufacturing and Assembly

The team implemented a variety of techniques in order to mate the drive components to the vehicle
chassis. All fixtures and assemblies were designed in SolidWorks 08-09.Seen below is a SW and physical
assembly of the motor mount with motor installed.

Figure 10: SW Motor Mount Assembly

Figure 11: Physical Motor Mount Assembly

22
The OMAX Water Jet two-dimensional cutting machine was used to cut the motor mount plate as well
as attachment tabs out of 0.25 inch steel. The motor was bolted within the mount plate. The tabs were
then bolted to the mount plate and aligned on the frame so as to allow the motor sprocket to align with
the rear sprocket.

Shown below are both a SW rendering of the battery box assembly as well as the final product. There
are two battery boxes within the vehicle where two batteries are held within each box. The retaining
trays are comprised of one inch, angle iron steel. When placed inside a tray, the batteries have 0.75
inches of clearance between them at the center of the tray. This was done to allow cooling airflow
between the batteries as well as directing air towards the motor behind them.

Figure 12: SW Assembly for batter boxes

23
 Figure 13: Final battery boxes

The retaining clamps in the final assembly are slightly different than the SW rendering. The team chose
wider battery retaining clamps as well as a vertical aluminum retaining bar.

Both the motor mount and battery box assemblies are contained within a 1 in. tubular steel sub-frame.
A total of four steel retaining tubes were used to house these components. The original IC motorcycle
used its engine as a stressed member of the frame, meaning no sub-frame was present after the IC
engine was removed. Below, the battery boxes sit behind the front wheel, and were welded to the sub-
frame. The motor mount was welded to the sub-frame at its forward end in order to reduce any
dynamic load on the vehicle produced on the motor.

24
 Figure 14: Steel tubing sub-frame

The charger can be seen on the above image, it is located directly above the motor. Mounting holes
were drilled and the charger was bolted to both the steel sub-frame and original chassis. The motor
controller and contactor are both mounted beneath the seat and are housed within the aluminum
panels. This location was chosen as it protects these components from moisture. Simple tabs were
welded to the frame for the motor controller to bolt into. The contactor utilized two mounting holes
already present on the frame.

The steering assembly was revised after the original handle bars were discovered to be bent. Utilizing
the original mounting locations, a new steering assembly was cut out of 0.5 in aluminum plate to house
the new handlebars. An added benefit of the new assembly is the riders more aggressive riding position.
The rider is now located further forward on the chassis and sits lower than with the original handlebars.
Frontal area of the vehicle and rider was reduced from 690 in2 to 633 in2.

25
Figure 15: Original steering assembly was bent beyond repair

Figure 16: SW rendering of revised steering assembly

Figure 17: Revised steering assembly mounted on vehicle.

26
 Figure 18: Revised steering assembly
The cockpit instrument displays were mounted within a 0.25 in. thick aluminum plate. They can be seen
in the Operator’s Manual portion of the report. Three sheets of thin aluminum were used to cover the
weather-sensitive components of the drive system. The sheets were cut using metal sheers to the
outline of the original frame. They act as a simple means of weather proofing the components.

Figure 19: Aluminum Weatherproofing

27
The forward lighting assembly is comprised of an aluminum retaining ring that houses the headlight.
Three tabs are used to align the light in both the horizontal and vertical directions so as to efficiently
light the road. The assembly is bolted to 0.5 in. angle iron steel, which is welded to the frame. Lastly, an
aerodynamic fairing was added to the forward lighting assembly. While the team found no increase in
performance from the fairing, it directs the airflow over the motorcycle more efficiently and decreases
wind buffeting on the rider.

Figure 20: Headlight and fairing

28
Operator’s Manual

This manual was written to enhance the operator’s safety and enjoyment when using the Electric
Motorcycle. The following will give the operator an overview of the various features and safety
precautions for your electric motorcycle. Adhering to the following will ensure a long and trouble free
life of the vehicle.

Safety

All riders should have attended a Motorcycle Safety Course and should possess a Motorcycle
Endorsement on their driver’s license.

Riding in inclement weather: When riding in wet days is unavoidable, use extra caution on the
motorcycle. Take care not to fully immerse the batteries in water. Do not allow water to enter the
battery terminals. Do not allow water to flood under the seating area to avoid electric degradations.

Carrying a passenger: The motorcycle was designed as a one person vehicle – Though a passenger seat
and foot pegs have been provided, transporting a passenger is not recommended due to the fact that
the added weight will reduce the vehicle’s range significantly.

Instruments and Controls

The following depicts the basic operations the rider will need to be familiar with to operate the vehicle.
Below is the cockpit layout; the throttle and front brake are operated by the rider’s right hand. All
important vehicle data is displayed on the Cycle Analyst LCD screen and battery meter. The Rider’s left
hand controls the vehicle’s lighting.

29
 Cycle Analyst and Battery Meter

Lighting and
Horn Controls Ignition Switch

Throttle

Figure 21: Insert key into ignition and turn clockwise to switch ON vehicle

Throttle and Front

Brake Lever

Figure 22: Twist throttle counter-clockwise to accelerate. Pull brake lever to slow the vehicle.

Figure 23: Low/High Beam headlight selector, indicator selector and horn button

30
 Figure 24: Depress the rear brake to slow the vehicle

Figure 25: Pull the toggle towards the rear of the vehicle to release the seat

Figure 26: Left and Right buttons toggle between display screens

The default screen shows 5 pieces of information that are most relevant to the rider. This includes three
instantaneous quantities: the voltage of the battery pack, the power output in watts, and the speed of

31
the vehicle; as well as two accumulated quantities: trip distance in miles and net amp-hours (Ah) from
the battery. Toggle right or left to view other display screens of interest; hold down the right button to
reset trip statistics. The 2nd display shows solely the electrical information of the system, including the
current in amps. Additional button presses scroll through a total of 7 display screens that show a range
of statistical information relating to the energy use of your vehicle.

Display Screen #3 - Power Information

Watt-hrs: This is a measure of the total energy that has been pulled out of the battery pack.
Wh/km or Wh/mi: The watt-hours used per unit of distance travelled is a measure of the average
energy efficiency of the vehicle.

Display Screen #4 - Regenerative Braking

The vehicle is not equipped with this feature

Display Screen #5 - Peak Statistics

The peak electrical statistics yield information that is useful to understanding the electrical limits that
the battery is subject to.
A-min: Peak negative or regen current that was captured by the meter.
A-max: Maximum amperage that was drawn from the battery.
V-min: The voltage of a battery pack will sag, sometimes considerably, when it is under heavy load.
Vmin is a local minimum measurement that shows by how much your packs voltage drops.

Display Screen #6 - Speeds and Time

S-max and S-avg: The maximum and average speed of the vehicle in the programmed units of km/hr or
mi/hr.
0h00m00s: This is the trip time in hours, minutes, and seconds. It counts only the time that the vehicle is
in motion, and stops incrementing once the speed falls to zero.

Display Screen #7 - Lifecycle Statistics

The final display screen provides the lifetime information of the battery pack. These figures are
especially useful in computing the lifecycle costs of the vehicle and comparing the economics of
different battery chemistries. This display is not shown when the vehicle is in motion.

32
Cycl: The cycles value increments when the meter is reset.
Tot-Ah: The total battery amp-hours is a running sum of battery use over its life to the nearest 1Ah.
Tot-Mi or Tot-Km: This is the odometer function, showing the total distance that has been travelled on
the battery pack.

Additional Resetting Options

In addition to a regular reset to clear the trip distance, time, and A-hr data there are two other reset
possibilities.
Peak Reset
In some instances for diagnostic and performance testing, it is desirable to clear only the peak statistics
(A-max, A-min, V-min, and S-max) without resetting anything else. This can be accomplished by holding
the left reset button when the display is showing A-min, A-max, and V-min. The message "PEAK STATS
RESET" will appear on the screen and only the previously mentioned values will be cleared.

Full Reset
When it is time to switch battery packs, then the battery cycle count, lifetime amp-hours, and total
distance can be zeroed by performing a full reset on the system. This is accomplished by continuing to
hold the button for 6 seconds after "RESET" is displayed. The message "FULL RESET" will appear to
indicate that all stored data has been cleared from memory. Notice that a Full Reset does not restore
any of the gain or calibration values that may have been changed in the setup menu.

Setup Menu
There are many setup options that can be accessed by holding down the right button while the unit is
being powered on. After the welcome screen you will see the text “SETUP”, at which point you can
navigate through the setup options in the following manner:
Press the right button briefly to toggle the information at hand.
Hold the right button down for one second to save that information.

33
Riding

Starting the motorcycle

When starting the motorcycle, make sure the throttle is in the closed position. Push down and turn the
ignition key clockwise to turn the motorcycle ON.

Figure 27: Ignition Switch

Stopping the motorcycle

Apply the front brake by squeezing the front brake lever toward the grip. The brake light will come on
when the lever is squeezed. Depressing the rear brake pedal will apply the rear disk brake. The brake
light will be illuminated when the rear brake is operated.

Lighting

Left and right indicator lights will be illuminated when selected via the indicator light switch. The high
beam headlight is illuminated when the headlight switch is pushed forward. The low beam is always
illuminated per Florida Law.

34
 Figure 28: Illuminated Headlight

Figure 29: Illuminated Tail Light

The throttle grip controls the engine speed based on the position of the throttle. Twist it toward you to
increase engine speed. Turn it away from you to decrease engine speed.

When stopping and parking your motorcycle: Allow the throttle to completely close when stopping,
apply the front and rear brake at the same time. Turn the ignition key to the left (OFF position) before
dismounting the vehicle. The motorcycle is completely silent when at rest. Always be mindful of the
vehicle when the throttle is in the closed position – turning off the ignition when mounting and
dismounting will prevent accidental starts.)

35
Charging

The motorcycle is equipped with an onboard charger. This charger operates using any 120V power
outlet. To recharge the vehicle, turn the ignition key to the off position. The charging plug is located
under the driver’s seat. Remove the seat and connect the plug to the outlet and allow the vehicle to
charge. There is an LED ‘state of charge indicator’ on the left hand side of the charger. It will remain lit
when the vehicle is charging and will flash when the vehicle has attained a full charge.

36
Vehicle Testing and Data Analysis

A variety of tests were performed in order to quantify the performance of the vehicle. Tests include:
Peak Performance - acceleration from rest to maximum velocity, Maximum Vehicle Range at controlled
speed and Real World Performance.

Peak Performance

The goal of the peak performance test was to quantify the vehicles performance in terms of horsepower
and torque at any given engine speed. The team tested the vehicle on level ground with negligible wind
speed. From rest, the rider accelerated the vehicle at maximum throttle to a speed of 50 mph. A video
camera recorded the motorcycles speed as it was displayed on the speedometer. The video was later
analyzed where vehicle speed and pack voltage were recorded every 0.5 seconds from rest to 50 mph. A
series of equations for calculating net vehicle power were applied.

The amount of energy required to power the vehicle at each 0.5 second interval was calculated using
the equation, Energy = ½ MV2. Energy was calculated as Joules, Mass was measured in kilograms and
encompassed both the vehicle and rider, and velocity was measured in meters per second. Joules are a
measurement of energy and were converted to watts which are used to quantify power, where 1 Watt =
1 Joule/second. Horsepower and torque were back calculated from the instantaneous wattage. Engine
speed (RPM) was quantified using the speed of the vehicle, the gear ratio between the pinion and rear
sprocket as well as tire circumference. Motor torque was found as a function of horsepower, motor
speed and time. Peak horsepower and torque were found to be 7.47 hp and 18.99 lb-ft.

37
 Electric Motorcycle
Power Curves
8.00 20
7.00 18
16
Horsepower HP

6.00

Torque lb-ft
14
5.00 12
4.00 10
3.00 8 Power HP
6
2.00 Torque lb-ft
4
1.00 2
0.00 0
0
790
1,405
2,061
2,216
2,547
2,669
2,871
2,959
2,973
3,108
3,182
3,209
3,243
3,277
3,290
3,317
3,358
Motor RPM

Figure 30: HP and Torque as a function of engine speed

At the onset of the project, the team chose a series of benchmarks to put into perspective the achieved
performance of the Electric Café. The following electric motorcycles represent three levels of
performance for comparison.

38
 Top
Claimed HP Battery Capacity Battery Range Charge Time
Brand Speed
(hp) (KwHr, V) Chemistry (miles) (hours)
(mph)

Quantya
16 1.9, 52 Li-ion 25 40 3
EVO1

Brammo
17 3.1, 76.8 LiFePO4 42 60 4
Enertia

Electric 4/1.5

Motorsport 19 3.3, 81 LiFePO4 60 70 Stock/

GPR-S Performance

Senior
8, 15 peak 2.1, 48 SLA 20 51 3.5
Design

The team has achieved comparable performance to all three benchmarks with respect to top speed and
recharge time. The Electric Café’s limited range is only a function of its power source. The sealed lead
acid battery pack lacks performance in a variety of areas when compared to the Li-Ion packs used in the
benchmarks. It is of much greater weight per energy density and is of lesser voltage. The following
graph quantifies the horsepower produced up to 67 mph of the Brammo Enertia and the Electric
Motorsport GPR-S (denoted Native S).

39
 Figure 31: Horsepower vs vehicle speed for benchmarks

A similar graph is shown below which illustrates the performance of the Electric Café. As stated earlier,
the team produced a peak power of 7.47 hp. The higher horsepower ratings of the benchmarks are
explained by larger motors as well as higher voltage battery packs. Ultimately, for a budget of only 20%
of the retail price of each of the benchmarks, the team is pleased with the results.

40
 Power HP
8.00

7.00

6.00
Horsepower HP

5.00

4.00

3.00 Power HP

2.00

1.00

0.00
0
11.7
20.8
30.5
32.8
37.7
39.5
42.5
43.8
44
46
47.1
47.5
48
48.5
48.7
49.1
49.7
Vehicle Speed MPH

The team produced peak power at approximately 38 mph. Acceleration from rest to 40 mph is achieved
in 7 seconds, while 0-50 mph is achieved in 20 seconds. Above 44 mph, vehicle performance decreases
sharply.

Internal Combustion Engine Motorcycle Comparison

The graph below depicts the performance curves of a 250cc Kawasaki Ninja Sportbike. The ninja
produces a maximum power of 28.53 hp at approximately 11,000 rpm. Peak torque is 13.09 lb-ft at
approximately 9,000 rpm. Internal combustion engines cannot produce large horsepower or torque at
low engine speed. They can only increase useable power by means of a transmission. This is one aspect
of electric vehicles where they are vastly superior to IC vehicles. Most commercial electric vehicles as
well as the Electric Café only utilize single speed transmissions; this is due to an electric motors ability to
produce instantaneous torque at low engine speed. A gear ratio of 4.865:1 results from the 14 tooth
pinion and 68 tooth rear sprocket. The motor has a published maximum engine speed of 3,200 rpm, but
after testing the team discovered that at 50 mph, the motor was spinning at 3,378 rpm. Excessive use of
the vehicle over its maximum rated speed is not recommended, and the team has since detuned the

41
motor speed controller to cap the motor at 3,200 rpm. Lastly, the Electric Café produces higher peak
torque ratings than the Ninja.

Figure 32: Dynamometer graph of Kawasaki Ninja EX250 Motorcycle

Maximum Vehicle Range at Controlled Speed

From a full state of charge, the team ran the motorcycle at a continuous average speed of 25 mph and
achieved a range of 20 miles before requiring a recharge. The test was performed on the St. Mark’s
River Trail which runs from southern Tallahassee to St. Marks Florida. Comprised of a 16 mile level
surface with only two points where the vehicle was required to stop. This test depicts the maximum
achievable range of the vehicle. However it is not a realistic means of quantifying range.

Real World Performance

The team has logged over 200 miles on the vehicle since the Cycle Analyst was installed. When driven in
city traffic, the Electric Café can travel 17 miles between charges. The vehicle is generally driven in a

42
variety of motor environments, comprising of stop and go traffic, road speeds over 40 mph and hills of
varying inclines.

Cost Comparison

US citizens travel approximately 13,000 miles per year via motor vehicles. The team applied these
numbers to the Electric Café and compared both cost and carbon dioxide emissions to the Kawasaki
Ninja IC motorcycle. When charged from a drained state, the vehicle consumes ~2 kW-hrs of electricity.
The city of Tallahassee charges 12 cents per kW-hr, resulting in a cost of ~25 cents per charge. The
annual cost to operate the Electric Café for 13,000 miles per year is $161.25 and can be seen calculated
below.

 12,900miles/yr  $ $
  * 0.25 = $161.25
 20miles  charge yr

The Kawasaki Ninja’s engine recommends premium fuel, as of November 2010, the average cost of
octane 93 gasoline in the US was $3.13. The Kawasaki has a published efficiency of 50 mpg. The team
then calculated the annual cost of gasoline for the Ninja.

 12,900miles / yr  $
  * 3.13 ppg = 807.54
 50mpg  yr

As shown in the two cost comparison, the Ninja is much more expensive to operate than the Café.

Emissions Comparison

Tallahassee creates electricity via a natural gas fueled, steam turbine power plant. Given that the plant
emits 1.14 lbs of CO2 for every kW-Hr of energy generated, the Café emits 2.28 lbs of CO2 into the
atmosphere per charge. Over the course of one year (645 charges), approximately 1,500 lbs of CO2 will
be emitted via recharging the vehicle. Alternatively, the Ninja will output approximately 4,300 lbs of CO2
per year via gasoline combustion.

 kW   lbs   lbs 
  *   =  
 yr   kW   yr 

43
Environmental Concerns

The world’s transportation needs are growing and will continue to do so. As a result, the transportation
sector is becoming increasingly linked to environmental problems. Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue and Dr.
Claude Comtois, of the Dept. of Global Studies and & Geography wrote in an article, “It has reached a
point where transportation activities are a dominant factor behind the emission of most pollutants and
thus their impacts on the environment.” Several million tons of harmful greenhouse gases are released
into the atmosphere each year due to transportation activities. It is clear that the burning of
hydrocarbons through the use of the internal combustion engine negatively affects the air quality of the
planet.

Air pollution accumulating from vehicle emissions is damaging to human health. These toxic pollutants
have been linked to respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer.

It is believed that the high noise levels of ICE vehicles has an adverse affect on the hearing organ which
may in turn affect ones quality of life. Studies support that noise from the movement of trains, planes,
cars and other types of vehicles can increase ones risk for cardiovascular disease.

Water quality has also been adversely affected due to transport activities. Fuel, chemical and other
hazardous particulates improperly discarded from cars and trucks will drain into and contaminate water
supplies. According to the EPA, 52 million new cars were registered in 2007. An increase in the number
of vehicles on the road will increase the demand for foreign oil, therefore increasing this nation’s
dependence on foreign nations. In addition, the disastrous effects of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill will be
seen for decades.

The electric vehicle (EV) has the potential to dramatically reduce the environmental impact of the
transportation industry. Though EV’s produce no direct air pollution, they are certainly not zero-
emission vehicles. The electricity that is used to charge the batteries of an EV may still be produced in
environmentally unfriendly power plants, like coal plants which generate over 50 percent of the United
State’s power needs. Equally important is the fact that EV’s can be recharged via either sustainable or
renewable means of energy. In addition to reducing emissions, production EV’s are arguably less
straining on Earth’s resources. EV motors are generally more compact, requiring less material than a
comparable internal combustion engine. Until the means to store the necessary energy for long distance
drives catches up to that of fossil fuels, the EV will not become a staple of the roadways. Though it

44
needs an adverse amount of storage for the battery pack, some argue that the sparse total material
used in an electric motor is a tradeoff between those necessary for an internal combustion engine.

The batteries used to power EVs pose some potential environmental and health risks. Lead is highly
toxic and the EPA has imposed several regulations to reduce humans’ exposure to the substance.
According to the EPA 1.3 million metric tons of lead are consumed in the US each year and 79 % of
which can be found in lead acid batteries. Short-term exposure to high levels of lead can cause vomiting,
diarrhea, convulsions, coma or even death. Regular exposure to even a very small amount of lead can be
harmful, especially to infants and young children. Lead can also damage the brain and nervous system.
Some other symptoms are: appetite loss, abdominal pain, constipation, fatigue, sleeplessness,
irritability, and headaches. Thankfully, the lead-acid batteries in the team’s pack are sealed and will
never require direct contact with the user.

Lithium-ion batteries offer the benefit of having a higher energy density in a lighter and more compact
package. Lithium is a highly reactive, equating to a chance that the battery pack may burst into flames if
experiencing thermal runaway. All packs are mated to a battery management system, making fire
uncommon. According to an article on howstuffworks.com, three out of every 1 million batteries have
been reported to fail in such a way.

Recyclables/Hazardous_Materials
The EPA reports that more than 97 percent of battery lead is recyclable. The plastic casings can be
recycled for later use. The discarded acid can be neutralized and released in the sewer system or it can
be reclaimed and reused in new batteries. The acid can also be treated and used as agricultural fertilizer;
lastly it can be converted to gypsum for use in the production of cement.

Finally, in converting the internal combustion motorcycle to an electric motorcycle, it’s inevitable that
the IC engine and its components will become unnecessary in the operation of the electric motorcycle.
These parts will need to be sold to a willing proprietor or scrapped. If not properly disposed of or
recycled, they will end up in a landfill.

45
Website
Please select the following link to view the website: www.eng.fsu.edu/~thorry/electriccafe. The site
discusses the teams overall goal and focus on the homepage. It provides a brief bio of each of the team
members on the Team page. The Design portion of the site is a timeline of the overall design and build
process. On the Media page, both pictures and videos can be viewed of the build. Each of the team’s
required assignments have been uploaded to the Deliverables page. Lastly, links to our sponsor’s
website are given on the Sponsors page.

Figure 33: Screen shot of team website

46
Results Discussion and Conclusion

Overall findings prove that while the Electric Café is not capable of long-range travel, it is a viable means
of transportation for the urban environment commuter. As of 2008, half of the world’s population now
lives in either cities or towns with daily commutes less than 40 miles. A large portion of these
commuters could reduce their carbon footprint greatly by purchasing an electric motorcycle.

In the Testing and Data Analysis portion of the report, the team compared the performance of the Café
to three benchmarks as well as the original IC motorcycle. Though lacking in overall vehicle range as
compared to all competitors, the Café performed well elsewhere. It produced more motor torque than
the Ninja – a function of its electric drive system. Secondly, the Café can travel at a faster rate of speed
than the Quantya EVO1. When recharging, all benchmarks can recharge their packs in approximately
three to four hours. The Café is capable of a full recharge in 3.5 hours, putting it on par with its
competitors. Concerning emissions analysis to its IC counterpart – as expected, the Café is far more
environmentally friendly than the Ninja. It is also far less expensive to operate on a yearly basis.

The team found the Café lacking in areas not pertaining to benchmarks or the IC motorcycle. As a rule of
thumb, lightweight design is paramount to designing an efficient electric vehicle. Due to the time
restraints placed on the team, the vehicle was not sufficiently lightened. If the team had the larger
chassis in the first semester, an aluminum frame would have been designed around the original wheels
and suspension – taking place of the steel frame. Aluminum weighs approximately half as much per foot
as steel. Frame weight would have been reduced by 50 lbs, resulting in a more efficient vehicle.
Secondly, time constraints did not allow the team to increase the aerodynamic performance of the
vehicle. Plans were made to design fiberglass, aerodynamic fairings in order to decrease viscous drag on
the rider and motorcycle.

It is recommended that the user adhere to the guidelines in the Operator’s Manual at all times. Care
should be taken so as not to expose the vehicle to extremely low temperature’s as they can damage the
battery pack.

The three stated goals of the project were all achieved. The vehicle can travel up to 51 mph, twice as
fast as the minimum required top speed of 25 mph. Maximum vehicle range is 20 miles, four times
further than the five miles we were asked to achieve. Lastly, the vehicle recharges in 3.5 hours, which is
less than half as long as the time limit of eight hours for recharge.

47
The team remained under budget throughout the project and produced an efficient means of two
wheeled transportation. Each of the team’s project goals were completed. Secondary goals such as
vehicle lighting and licensing were achieved as well. As is seen in the power curves, the vehicle produces
comparable performance to each of the benchmarks at a fraction of the cost. The vehicle’s user intends
to ride the motorcycle approximately 8-15 miles per day, making it a viable source of transportation.
The team is extremely satisfied with the physical result as well as the reduced environmental impact of
the vehicle.

48
 Works Cited

1. Advanced Battery Systems, LLC. 8 February 2010 http://www.advancedbattery.com/

2. BatteryMart.com. 8 February 2010 <http://www.batterymart.com/>.
3. Ehsani, Mehrdad, Yimin Gao, Sebastien E. Gay, Ali Emadi. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and
Fuel Cell Vehicles. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2005
4. Electric motor superstore 8 February 2010 www.emotorstore.com/
5. Electric Motor Handbook, Mcgraw Hill Handbooks, H. Wayne Beaty and James L Kirtley, Jr.
copyright 1998, The McGraw Hill Companies, Inc. New York, NY 10011.
6. Emotors Online.8 February 2010 http://www.e-motorsonline.com
7. Neatorama.com 21 February 2010 <http://www.neatorama.com/2007/01/27/
8. Norton, Robert L. Machine Design: An Integrated Approach. New Jersey: Presntice Hall: 2006
9. Rotating Eectrical Machines and Power Systems, Dale R. Patrick and Stephen W Fardo. Second
edition. Copyright 1997. The Fairmont Press, inc, Linburn GA.
10. The Control Techniques Drives and Controls Handbook. Editors: Pro. A. T. Johns and D. F. Warne.
IEE Power and Energy Series 35. Copyright 2001, The Institution of Electrical Engineers.
11. The Fundamentals of Electrical Drives, 2nd Edition, Gopal K. Dubey. Copyright 2001, printed in
India.
12. < EPA. US. Solid Waste and Emergency Response. States' Effort to Promote Lead-acid Battery
Recycling. 1992. Print.
<http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch8en/conc8en/ch8c1en.html>.

49
Appendix A: Major Part Drawings
For drawings, assemblies and calculations from Semester 1, please see the
Semester I Design Report.

Battery Drawing:
Quantity 2; Comprised of four, 1 inch angle iron steel struts were welded at 45° angles

50
Battery tray top:

51
Motor Mount (Steel):

52
Handlebar Bracket:

53
Headlight Ring:

54
Instrument Cluster (Aluminum):

55
Raw Data used for Power Equations:

Time s Adj time Voltage V Velocity mph Velocity m/s Velocity in/s Energy J Power Watts Power HP Motor RPM Torque lb-ft
4 0 50.7 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 1 49.9 7.5 3.35 132.00 1324.00 1324.00 1.77 506.73 18.39
6 2 38 11.7 5.23 205.92 3222.08 1611.04 2.16 790.50 14.35
6.5 2.5 38 14.8 6.62 260.48 5155.70 2062.28 2.76 999.95 14.52
7 3 38.9 20.8 9.30 366.08 10183.36 3394.45 4.55 1405.33 17.01
7.5 3.5 35.6 27.1 12.11 476.96 17286.33 4938.95 6.62 1830.98 18.99
8 4 35.5 30.5 13.63 536.80 21895.96 5473.99 7.34 2060.70 18.70
8.5 4.5 35.5 30.8 13.77 542.08 22328.82 4961.96 6.65 2080.97 16.79
9 5 38.2 32.8 14.66 577.28 25322.82 5064.56 6.79 2216.10 16.09
9.5 5.5 38.2 34.7 15.51 610.72 28341.53 5153.01 6.91 2344.47 15.47
10 6 40.4 37.7 16.85 663.52 33453.92 5575.65 7.47 2547.16 15.41
10.5 6.5 41.4 38.6 17.26 679.36 35070.26 5395.42 7.23 2607.97 14.56
11 7 41.4 39.5 17.66 695.20 36724.72 5246.39 7.03 2668.78 13.84
11.5 7.5 41.4 40 17.88 704.00 37660.35 5021.38 6.73 2702.56 13.08
12 8 43.3 42.5 19.00 748.00 42515.00 5314.37 7.12 2871.47 13.03
12.5 8.5 43.3 42.5 19.00 748.00 42515.00 5001.76 6.70 2871.47 12.26
13 9 43.3 43.8 19.58 770.88 45155.70 5017.30 6.73 2959.30 11.94
13.5 9.5 43.3 43.8 19.58 770.88 45155.70 4753.23 6.37 2959.30 11.31
14 10 44.4 44 19.67 774.40 45569.02 4556.90 6.11 2972.82 10.79
14.5 10.5 44.4 44 19.67 774.40 45569.02 4339.91 5.82 2972.82 10.28
15 11 44.8 46 20.56 809.60 49805.81 4527.80 6.07 3107.94 10.26
15.5 11.5 44.8 46 20.56 809.60 49805.81 4330.94 5.81 3107.94 9.81
16 12 45.4 47.1 21.06 828.96 52216.30 4351.36 5.83 3182.26 9.63
16.5 12.5 45.4 47.1 21.06 828.96 52216.30 4177.30 5.60 3182.26 9.24
17 13 45.6 47.5 21.23 836.00 53106.97 4085.15 5.48 3209.29 8.96
17.5 13.5 45.6 47.5 21.23 836.00 53106.97 3933.85 5.27 3209.29 8.63
18 14 45.8 48 21.46 844.80 54230.90 3873.64 5.19 3243.07 8.41
18.5 14.5 45.8 48 21.46 844.80 54230.90 3740.06 5.01 3243.07 8.12
19 15 45.9 48.5 21.68 853.60 55366.59 3691.11 4.95 3276.85 7.93
19.5 15.5 45.9 48.5 21.68 853.60 55366.59 3572.04 4.79 3276.85 7.67
20 16 45.9 48.7 21.77 857.12 55824.17 3489.01 4.68 3290.37 7.47
21 17 46 48.8 21.82 858.88 56053.66 3297.27 4.42 3297.12 7.04
22 18 46.1 49.1 21.95 864.16 56744.96 3152.50 4.23 3317.39 6.69
23 19 46.2 49.5 22.13 871.20 57673.29 3035.44 4.07 3344.42 6.39
24 20 46.3 49.7 22.22 874.72 58140.28 2907.01 3.90 3357.93 6.09
24.5 20.5 46.3 50 22.35 880.00 58844.29 2870.45 3.85 3378.20 5.98

56