Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 20 of 89 Posts

·
Registered
2021 Corsa-e
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In various online sources, they mention that the batteries of the Corsa-e (and it's "cousins" like the Peugeot e208, DS E-tense) are placed "under the seats".
My question is: are the batteries under the chassis, or really in the passenger compartment?

The reason I ask is because of risk of radiation.
I don't want to open the general discussion whether EV's generate more or less radiation than ICE vehicles.
My personal thought is that if they are under the chassis, there is less risk of radiation passing to to the passengers. But I may be mistaken.

This is also important to know in regards to wading height, and in general the risk of the batteries getting wet.
MG for example mention many time that thier batteries are IP 67 protected. In the ZS EV the batteries are placed under the chassis, so thats an important measure.
Are the Corsa-e batteries also IP rated?
Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,110 Posts
In various online sources, they mention that the batteries of the Corsa-e (and it's "cousins" like the Peugeot e208, DS E-tense) are placed "under the seats".
My question is: are the batteries under the chassis, or really in the passenger compartment?

The reason I ask is because of risk of radiation.
I don't want to open the general discussion whether EV's generate more or less radiation than ICE vehicles.
My personal thought is that if they are under the chassis, there is less risk of radiation passing to to the passengers. But I may be mistaken.

This is also important to know in regards to wading height, and in general the risk of the batteries getting wet.
MG for example mention many time that thier batteries are IP 67 protected. In the ZS EV the batteries are placed under the chassis, so thats an important measure.
Are the Corsa-e batteries also IP rated?
Thanks.
April 1st is still some months away. Have you got your dates confused? 😁
 

·
Registered
2021 Corsa-e
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
April 1st is still some months away. Have you got your dates confused? 😁
No, I'm serious :rolleyes:
I'm not that ignorant, but just wondering why I haven't heard of any IP ratings for PSA Group EVs.
If the batteries are in the compartment (inside the chassis) maybe there is no need for such a rating because in general water should not ingress into the compartment. But then that raises the question about radiation...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,110 Posts
In various online sources, they mention that the batteries of the Corsa-e (and it's "cousins" like the Peugeot e208, DS E-tense) are placed "under the seats".
My question is: are the batteries under the chassis, or really in the passenger compartment?

The reason I ask is because of risk of radiation.
I don't want to open the general discussion whether EV's generate more or less radiation than ICE vehicles.
My personal thought is that if they are under the chassis, there is less risk of radiation passing to to the passengers. But I may be mistaken.

This is also important to know in regards to wading height, and in general the risk of the batteries getting wet.
MG for example mention many time that thier batteries are IP 67 protected. In the ZS EV the batteries are placed under the chassis, so thats an important measure.
Are the Corsa-e batteries also IP rated?
Thanks.
In general all modern BEVs have the battery packs underslung under the body or forming part of the " skateboard". They need to be low for stability amongst other issues.
PSA BEVs are the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,110 Posts
In various online sources, they mention that the batteries of the Corsa-e (and it's "cousins" like the Peugeot e208, DS E-tense) are placed "under the seats".
My question is: are the batteries under the chassis, or really in the passenger compartment?

The reason I ask is because of risk of radiation.
I don't want to open the general discussion whether EV's generate more or less radiation than ICE vehicles.
My personal thought is that if they are under the chassis, there is less risk of radiation passing to to the passengers. But I may be mistaken.

This is also important to know in regards to wading height, and in general the risk of the batteries getting wet.
MG for example mention many time that thier batteries are IP 67 protected. In the ZS EV the batteries are placed under the chassis, so thats an important measure.
Are the Corsa-e batteries also IP rated?
Thanks.
In general IP ratings which are to determine an enclosures resistance to penetration by fingers, dust, jets of water etc are used when purchasing the discrete item. Last time I checked, PSA weren't selling CorsaE batteries on the open market.
 

·
Registered
Nissan LEAF30
Joined
·
6,904 Posts
Given that the batteries are mounted underneath the body of the car and there are no fording depth restrictions to keep them dry you can safely assume that they are well protected. EM radiation is poorly understood but I'm sure will have been measured.
Worry more about the mobile phone signal and wireless charging for mobile phones than the battery and drive system for the car. It's so lucky that there are no EM emissions from ICE ...... :unsure:
 

·
Registered
2021 Corsa-e
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
AFAIK The PSA CMP platform is not a skateboard platform per say (as opposed to the VW platform for example for the ID.3 and ID.4)
I'm not confusing IP ratings with EM radiation, I guess it actually two questions in one.
 

·
Registered
2020 Vauxall Corsa E
Joined
·
914 Posts
In various online sources, they mention that the batteries of the Corsa-e (and it's "cousins" like the Peugeot e208, DS E-tense) are placed "under the seats".
My question is: are the batteries under the chassis, or really in the passenger compartment?

The reason I ask is because of risk of radiation.
I don't want to open the general discussion whether EV's generate more or less radiation than ICE vehicles.
My personal thought is that if they are under the chassis, there is less risk of radiation passing to to the passengers. But I may be mistaken.

This is also important to know in regards to wading height, and in general the risk of the batteries getting wet.
MG for example mention many time that thier batteries are IP 67 protected. In the ZS EV the batteries are placed under the chassis, so thats an important measure.
Are the Corsa-e batteries also IP rated?
Thanks.
The propulsion mechanisms of EVs runs on DC, and there's no radio connection to the batteries. Any modern car will have "Infomatics", i.e. will occasionally communicate with a central server if told to do so. But if you're and electrosensitive or something then everything that uses radio signals is common between EVs and modern ICE cars. Most of it is in the "infortainment" system.
 

·
Registered
Nissan LEAF30
Joined
·
6,904 Posts
AFAIK The PSA CMP platform is not a skateboard platform per say (as opposed to the VW platform for example for the ID.3 and ID.4)
I'm not confusing IP ratings with EM radiation, I guess it actually two questions in one.
138733

Above is an e-208 but it shows the point. The batteries are contained in metal enclosures, arguably below the structure usually referred to as the floor and still within something that would count as a Faraday cage (as would the car monocoque). They are safe in EMR terms for people in the car.
Arguably some of the other elements are less well protected, for example there are holes in the front bulkhead for wiring and the steering column that might allow emissions from the motor and inverter through.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
747 Posts
The reason I ask is because of risk of radiation.
I don't want to open the general discussion whether EV's generate more or less radiation than ICE vehicles.
My personal thought is that if they are under the chassis, there is less risk of radiation passing to to the passengers. But I may be mistaken.

This is also important to know in regards to wading height, and in general the risk of the batteries getting wet.
MG for example mention many time that thier batteries are IP 67 protected. In the ZS EV the batteries are placed under the chassis, so thats an important measure.
Are the Corsa-e batteries also IP rated?
Thanks.
Who's that trip-trapping across MY bridge? 😉

As above...be worried about electric fields if you like - there's no way I'd live underneath HV power lines, for example - but please do understand where they come from. DC batteries it is not.
 

·
Registered
2021 Corsa-e
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
Wow, thats a great cutout picture, thanks!
I haven't come upon it when searching. Mainly I've seen pictures like this one, which don't illustrate well where the batteries are in reference to the floor:
138734

I guess you are right above the main EMR producers which are the inverter and the motor. But they are farther away from vital organs, so they worry me less.
I was a bit worried about sitting above the batteries but if they are under the floor, it calms my worries :)

Having said that, I wonder how the ID.3 compares to other EVs, with its rear motor, in regards to rear passengers and EMR. Especially children who are more sensitive to radiation than adults :unsure:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
I think you need to take a more realistic and evidence based view of the risks in life. There are always unknowns but a good way of looking at it is to think about people who are routinely exposed to the environment of interest and see if there is any evidence of harm to them. We know that certain exposures carry risks because we can see the results in the people working with them, mad hatters and mercury, asbestos workers etc. There are populations such as radar engineers, military aircrew, train drivers and power station workers, who are chronically exposed to electric fields yet we see no significant harmful effects on them. Even so there are very strict workplace exposure limits. You understand that distance is important but a quick calculation would show that there are many other systems in the car which will expose you to EMR from the switchgear in the indicator stalks to the bluetooth communications. Modern cars don't simply switch things on and off, virtually everything is connected by CANBUS which means that there is a kHz-MHz signal in just about every conductor, even when switched off. If you are really worry about EMR and you understand the inverse cube law of distance then whatever you do make sure the car doesn't have heated seats.

Get a bicycle (but it will still need lights and they have batteries).
 

·
Registered
2021 Corsa-e
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Can you clarify what kind of radiation or radiations you're asking about and why it's important to be protected from them?
Electromagnetic radiation, in general.
The reason to be protected from these EM fields is because they (theoretically) can cause cancer.
I'm not an expert in this issue, but there are different types of radiation, some more dangerous, some less (in regards to the chances of them causing illnes or cancer).

Its true that many devices we use daily, such as mobile phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc. generate EM radiation, but they are referred to as non-ionizing and are considered less dangerous.
The distance from the source of radiation is important because the wave degrades as a function of distance.

Since we drive our cars for many hours a day, its important to be conscious of the theoretical risks (other than accidents of course). Especially since the car is like a metal cage, radiation could be trapped inside (Faraday Cage), exposing us to the radiation for longer periods of time.
The same goes for elevators, which is why you shouldn't use your mobile phone inside an elevator.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,110 Posts
I think you need to take a more realistic and evidence based view of the risks in life. There are always unknowns but a good way of looking at it is to think about people who are routinely exposed to the environment of interest and see if there is any evidence of harm to them. We know that certain exposures carry risks because we can see the results in the people working with them, mad hatters and mercury, asbestos workers etc. There are populations such as radar engineers, military aircrew, train drivers and power station workers, who are chronically exposed to electric fields yet we see no significant harmful effects on them. Even so there are very strict workplace exposure limits. You understand that distance is important but a quick calculation would show that there are many other systems in the car which will expose you to EMR from the switchgear in the indicator stalks to the bluetooth communications. Modern cars don't simply switch things on and off, virtually everything is connected by CANBUS which means that there is a kHz-MHz signal in just about every conductor, even when switched off. If you are really worry about EMR and you understand the inverse cube law of distance then whatever you do make sure the car doesn't have heated seats.

Get a bicycle (but it will still need lights and they have batteries).
Avoid petrol engines cars too. They have high voltage high frequency ignition systems.

Hopefully your computer is wired to the internet and not using WIFi.😁
 

·
Registered
Corsa-E Elite
Joined
·
62 Posts
and are considered less dangerous.
Scientifically RF is not considered dangerous AT ALL at these power levels.
Cars are usually tested in an RF anechoic chamber or open field site to make sure they don't produce any unexpected RF emissions. This is to prevent them interfering with other sensitive electronics which can accidently amplify these tiny signals and confuse the electronics. The RF power level pass criteria is millions of times smaller than the radiation you get from walking outside in the sun. It's like being worried about the energy coming off a candle at the other side of a stadium. The are other things to worry about in life.
I'm an Engineer who visits anechoic chambers to test things from time to time so know a thing or two.
 

·
Registered
Hyundai Ioniq Electric Premium SE 2018 Black
Joined
·
127 Posts
Electromagnetic radiation, in general.
The reason to be protected from these EM fields is because they (theoretically) can cause cancer.
I'm not an expert in this issue, but there are different types of radiation, some more dangerous, some less (in regards to the chances of them causing illnes or cancer).

Its true that many devices we use daily, such as mobile phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc. generate EM radiation, but they are referred to as non-ionizing and are considered less dangerous.
The distance from the source of radiation is important because the wave degrades as a function of distance.

Since we drive our cars for many hours a day, its important to be conscious of the theoretical risks (other than accidents of course). Especially since the car is like a metal cage, radiation could be trapped inside (Faraday Cage), exposing us to the radiation for longer periods of time.
The same goes for elevators, which is why you shouldn't use your mobile phone inside an elevator.
This looks like something you would be interested in. You would not have to worry about any vehicle or environment with potentially high amounts of EM radiation.

Protective clothing against electromagnetic radiation:

Holland Shielding



We are lucky we don't have radioactive fuel cell powered cars yet, else we would have to take even more precautions.
 

·
Registered
Soul EV 2020
Joined
·
74 Posts
BatShittery like this needs quashing as soon as it emerges - THIS IS CODSWALLOP of the finest order
- we've had too many "I'm not an expert but..." comments that throw doubt on established science and has given us the current political chaos in UK and US as well as vaccine fruit-loopery.

Go find ANY peer reviewed paper that even hints that DC battery EM even exists let alone is problematic - then you can make posts like this.
 
1 - 20 of 89 Posts
Top