| Author |
Message |
    
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 04:22 pm: | 
|
Ehh, nothing so grand as powertrain - I do electronics and wiring, which basically means I get to stick my nose into a little bit of everything.
Of course, without me and people like me, NOTHING on the car would work (as I'm oh so fond of telling belligerent managers/engineers)!
LOL...yeah, but a Prius weighs in a like 2600lbs. It's not tipping 5000-6000 like some full sized trucks and SUVs. Actually, it's not the engine's lack of power that causes problems. Electric motors are VASTLY more efficient than ICE (something like 93% for electric vs 15% for a normal ICE), it's just that they require such huge battery packs (currently) to power them that you're dumping more weight in than you're getting power back out.
edited by darthane on March 09, 2004 |
Andys
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 06:00 pm: |
|
I find it interesting that with all the technological leaps we've (you've) made in the car/bike industry, the battery has been the least(last?) change.
Wow, working the powertrain department! That's got to be the most interesting of all.
The EU has just signed off on new nose standards for hitting pedestrians. Higher noses, crush zones behind the grilles and the such.
How has this effected you in the immediate term? I've read that the car makers don't have to change current cars. Is that really true or are you having to go back and redo stuff?
Personally I think it's the most stupid thing going, just for the fact that one would think that the higher the hood the more likely it is that the pedestrian will go under the car (which I thought was worse). I always thought it's better to send the ped over the hood.
Plus it will ruin aerodynamics?
But who am I to say?
And you know this stuff will have to get here sometime. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 07:16 pm: |
|
"Electric motors are VASTLY more efficient than ICE (something like 93% for electric vs 15% for a normal ICE)"
However, we must consider how is the electrical energy generated? We don't pump it out of the ground like crude oil. If the electricity is generated via petroleum or coal fired powerplant... |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 07:44 pm: |
|
Whoa, there, I wasn't starting a debate about the supposed 'cleanliness' of electric engines versus ICE, only that of the energy put into them, less than 10% is wasted. An ICE, even a really, REALLY good one, wastes closer to 80% of the energy put into it.
When we get hydrogen fuel cells working, closed-loop ones especially, then we'll have truly clean cars. In fact, a close loop hydrogen fuel cell literally emits nothing in the way of drivetrain exhaust.
The main reason the battery is still the same is that it's pretty much as good as it gets. Also note: Your 12V battery is NOT actually a single 12V battery. It is a half dozen 2V batteries in series. We (collectively) haven't been able to come up with a battery that can produce the rerquired current and more than ~2V. That's why single cell batteries, such as AA, C, D, etc, are all 1.5V.
Crush zones? Couldn't tell ya. I stay away from body design - once upon a time I wanted to be an exterior designer, but in concept, not in the mechanical engineering side of it. I would imagine if the rules go into effect in say, 2008 or 2009, then everything that begins production that year will have to meet it. Bear in mind, though, that most companies do vehicle design on a 5 year rotation, so 2008 models are just getting started, with plenty of time to incorporate any nececssary changes before production.
Bryan |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 08:06 pm: |
|
Blake. Right on target about the inefficiency of electric cars. They run on coal and oil. How many miles will an electric car run on a barrel of oil? What are we going to do with the toxic metals that make up the catalysts in the hydrogen fuel cells when they need to be replaced? These are also rare earth metals. Is there enough to put in all the cars sold each year? What about when the fuel cell dies? How much does that cost to replace?
The gas/electric hybrids on the other hand do not have any of these problems. They use an extremely efficient (read peaky torque curve) gas or diesel engine to power the car at cruising speeds. Don't need a broad torque curve there. It uses the electric motor (high starting torque) to accelerate. The batteries charge while you're driving. Combined with regenerative braking and a form of fusion, the humans had found all the power they needed. 
My next car will be a hybrid. |
Andys
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 08:33 pm: |
|
Bryan,
Thanks for clearing up the battery thing. I never looked at it that way.
Sounds like you got a real cool job. Wish I could do the math. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:32 pm: |
|
Bryan,
Comparing the efficiency of electric motors to internal combustion engines is dishonest. THAT is what I was saying. If the electricity is produced by a steam turbine burning oil that has an efficiency of 20% tha in turn powers a generator with a 90% efficiency and then you transfer the electricity long distance over power lines that have a 90% overall efficiency and then charge a battery that is 90% efficient and discharge that battery at a 90% efficiency, then run the power through a motor that is 90% efficient, what is the overal efficiency of that? Answer 0.9^5*.2=10.6% Surprising isn't it.
By and large the cheapest source of energy is almost always the most efficient source of energy. Right now that is hydrocarbons. You'd think wind and hydro-electric would be cheaper. So far they aren't. Strange huh? |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:47 pm: |
|
Jay Leno article I read ( popular science? ) his 1903 electric gets 105 miles per charge, uses edison cells you can clean & rebuild yourself, and compares favorably with the "early" GM electric that goes 110 miles on a charge, and had non rebuildable cells. As Leno put it, "100 years, and they've added 5 miles" Not a practical car for him.
Chrysler tested & was supposed to do a hybrid Durango. I wonder when.
Diesel fuel in the U.S. is crud. If they made it like Jet fuel, the skies would be cleaner.
Read "The Prize" a great book on the oil industry. In a nutshell, the whole world is sucking out of the same set of puddles, so it behooves each company to suck & sell as fast as they can to make as much money as they can, before it's gone.
I also am amused that the pump price goes up as the barrel price does, but then has to wait for the price to stabilize (and that cost to traverse the pipeline to your pump) before going back down, if ever. |
Featheredfiend
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:47 pm: |
|
http://www.physicsweb.org/article/news/8/2/6
Hope no one here sold too soon into the corn rally. $2.955 on the overnight trade.
feathered |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 09:51 pm: |
|
I'll say this one more time. I was referring ONLY to the MECHANICAL EFFICIENCY of an ICE vs electric motor.
NOT the overall efficiency of the supply chain.
No, it's not surprising. I've done a lot of research into various 'alternative' power sources (both for automotive and mass power supply applications) over the years, due to personal interest, and have reached the exact same conclusions. Fascinating subject, really.
Feathered, excellent link. What they make mention of is the exact reason why there is such intense interest in 'closed-loop' fuel cells. Basically, there is a bunch of water that is broken down into it's component parts, producing hydrogen and oxygen. The process of rercombining the elements produces an electric charge and (tada!) water and the cycle continues. Haven't been able to make it feasible yet, though the theory is pretty cool.
But then, Communism worked great in theory, too.
edited by darthane on March 09, 2004 |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:05 pm: |
|
Bryan,
I know exactly what you were comparing. And I keep trying to tell you that it is a near meaningless comparison. The problem is that some people read such nonsense and start spouting it all over the place and then it becomes conventional wisdom and before you know it everything is one massive conspiracy to suppress the "world saving 90% efficient electric car."
So please, don't risk giving that kind of impression, not here anyway. That's all I'm saying.
"it's just that (electric cars) require such huge battery packs (currently) to power them that you're dumping more weight in than you're getting power back out."
On the highway, weight is of little consequence. So maybe our long haul big rigs would be the best candidates for electrification? On the other hand, if the electric car utilizes energy recoverage technology (generators for brakes), the extra energy required to get a heavy/massive battery laden car going would be largely recovered when it came time to stop, no? The main reason electric cars don't make sense right now... they are too expensive. |
Phillyblast
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:24 pm: |
|
here's an article (pdf) about fuel cell bus technology - I remember when I lived in Chicago they were running them as a demo - it was great to hop on the bicycle to commute home from work and get stuck behind one of them - no diesel fumes in my face.
Yep, what's powering the electric plant is a *whole* other argument. One of the arguments for electric vs. oil for cars and such I've heard is even if the electric plant is as much a polluter as the indivdual cars would be combined, it is a) a single source, therefore easier to apply scrubbing techniques to, etc. Easier to control one plant then try to ensure thousands of cars are meeting regs. and b) the pollution generated is away from the city centers, where it can disperse more easily.
Interesting sruff. Now if only I can get the required one jigga-watts and go back in time to when gas was 30 cents a gallon . . . |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:58 pm: |
|
Regenerative braking doesn't provide nearly the juice needed to recharge a spent battery. It's just one of the many ways of trying to eek every last drop out of the system (and it's a good idea, don't get me wrong). The generator (usually run off the ICE) is still supplying the vast majority of recharge.
And those massive battery packs are only required for 'true' electric vehicles, the battery packs in hybrids are proportionately smaller since they are only used for acceleration, not cruising.
WRT efficiency: I'm so sorry. I'll try to remember to spell out exactly what I mean everytime I state a fact. Just because you chose to broaden my statement into a generic 'electric cars are cleaner' (note - efficient does NOT mean clean, my statement said they are more EFFICIENT) doesn't in any way make it my fault that you did so.
We had our rash of 'electric cars will save the world'. Even the tree hugging hippies don't try to pull that shit anymore. Anyone with half a brain knows that the electricity's gotta come from somewhere and right now that 'somewhere' in the majority of the world is good old foul smelling atmosphere polluting fossil fuels.
If I had made the statement that switching to electric motors would reduce overall planetary emissions by, say, 28%, THEN I'd understand the argument. I'd also be full of hot carbon monoxide.
Bryan
edited by darthane on March 10, 2004 |
Brucelee
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 09:23 am: |
|
At 52 MPG on my xb, I feel pretty patriotic right now!!!! I guess I will have to drive it everywhere! |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 08:46 pm: |
|
The true efficiencies will only come when you can wean the the auto makers from internal combustion. They have spent lots of money on it, and are understandably reluctant to give them up. (they do represent 1940's state of the art for power per pound, & they are much better now )
How about, a hybrid using a fist sized ceramic turbine to run the generator, multi fuel diesel/alcohol/methane?
Steam cars were produced in Buffalo N.Y. up through the 70's by the Williams co. using Studebaker Avanti chassis & bodies, also multi fuel.
I may get & set up a S&S alcohol carb. Be good for backup. |
Mr_grumpy
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 01:41 pm: |
|
What you gonna run on? moonshine?  |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 04:21 pm: |
|
A turbine is more efficient than an internal combustion engine?
How about a direct injection compression ignition cruise mode for gasoline engines?
How about some friggin mass transit instead of the relentless expansion of superhighways in metropolitan areas?
How about not living more than a couple miles from where you work or go to school?
|
Hootowl
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 04:45 pm: |
|
Mass transit. There's an interesting subject. Buses do NOT work. Most of them run around empty save the driver. Subways DO work, but to implement one in an existing city takes a whole long time and even more money. I am all for mass transit, but the reality is that no one can afford to do it right, so it gets half assed with a few light rail projects that cost millions and serve very few people. They just finished building one such project here in Houston. The train has a top speed of 17 MPH and stops so much that it's faster to walk. It has already run over 21 cars since it's grand opening two months ago. $300 million down the tubes. And the mayor wonders why the city is $36 Million in the hole.
edited by hootowl on March 11, 2004 |
Mikej
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 04:49 pm: |
|
 |
Blackbelt
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 05:51 pm: |
|
there ya go.. get bryan off on a tangent... watch it or your head will explode with all those big words....
 |
Darthane
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 06:12 pm: |
|
Mikej - LOL That's my mode of personal transportation right now.
And the public transportation systems here are so good that I can't see the point in owning a car at all unless you live far from the city. It's actually more of a pain to drive in the city than it is to take the train/bus/streetcar. The US really needs to take a page from Japan's book when it comes to transportation.
Adam, you're just mad because the biggest word you know is 'blackbelt' and that's actually two smaller ones! :-P |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 08:52 pm: |
|
MrGrumpy. yes.
(A) - C - G - D - E (2x)
CHORUS:
A
Black powder and alcohol,
D
When the states and the cities fall,
G E
When your back is against the wall;
A
Black powder and alcohol.
A
Gimme charcoal to the measure two:
F
Send the bullet where you want it to.
D
Gimme sulphur to the measure three:
A
Make the powder gonna keep you free.
G E
Gimme saltpetre, measure fifteen:
A
Sweetest shooting that you've ever seen! (chorus)
Gimme water, yeast, and veggie-trash:
Leave it sitting in the slurry-mash.
When it's ready, put it in the still:
If you can't heat it, then the sunlight will.
Draw the alcohol away, and then
Put the slurry back, and start again! (chorus)
Booze'll clean your cuts, or run your car.
You can make it anywhere you are.
Black powder in your cartridge shell
Will send the robbers running clean to Hell.
You can make them if you just know how.
So kids, remember what I tell you now! (chorus & repeat
chorus)
(c) 9/1/85 by Leslie Fish and Random Factors
Thought this would be proper, considering the thread title.
Blake, turbines can be smaller, lighter, & more powerful ( pound for pound ) than IC engines, but you only get real advantages in an aircraft at real high altitude, ( where drag friction is lower, and IC engines need massive superchargers ) or in constant speed applications like turbo generators. If you have a small, say 150 hp turbine running an alternator, not connected physically to the drivetrain, a hybrid car would work nice. Small ceramic turbo's would be ideal, and fist sized ones putting out 250 hp. are in the next generation drones. Uncle paid for the R & D, so why not?
Bicycles rule in efficiency. Best calorie to mile ratio this side of Salmon.
|
Fullpower
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 09:56 pm: |
|
the brake thermal efficiency of a modern turbo-diesel is very near 40%. no other combustion engine of any kind comes close to this efficiency. that is why your bread, milk, eggs,apples, etc are delivered to market in diesel trucks. also why our kids are bused to school with diesel engines. simple economics. i have had 2 jeep cherokees the turbo diesel got 40 miles per gallon on the hiway, the gasoline version gets 20 mpg. had a gas powered 3/4 ton 4wd pickup got 10 mpg, the dodge turbo diesel gets 20 mpg on the road. hi temp gas turbines have some advantages such as power to weight ratio, but their thermal efficiency is nowhere near a 4 stroke gasoline engine, which in turn are less efficient than turbo diesels. pistons are going to be around for a long time. on another note, down below each of those petroleum deposits that we are happily sucking up, there is a deeper layer of 'heavy crude' very thick tarry hydrocarbons. have to heat em up with steam to liquify. the quantity of that substance is at least 10 times the known recoverable reserves of the 'light' crude that we are now using. prices will rise, but none of us alive today will see the end of of the piston engine engine as prime mover, dean said that |
Phillyblast
| | Posted on Thursday, March 18, 2004 - 07:50 am: |
|
Just saw that Neil Young's summer tour is powered by vegetable oil. Can I get fries with that? |
Jerome
| | Posted on Thursday, March 18, 2004 - 08:33 am: |
|
Mikej and Bryan, another alternative... I'm having a lot of fun with it.
 |
Mikej
| | Posted on Thursday, March 18, 2004 - 10:11 am: |
|
Jerome,
Nice. I've looked at a medium wheelbase version of one that seemed good. Haven't got one yet, but in the not so distant future. Just have to find one that takes 700c wheels. Looks like nice wheels on that one though. What brand of 'bent is it? |
Jerome
| | Posted on Thursday, March 18, 2004 - 11:16 am: |
|
This is a Hurricane, made in the Netherlands as usual... Mine is about the same style, I own a M5 ShockProof also made in the Netherlands. Great fun for commuting and for leisure. Zero pollution, zero carbon dioxide, perfect fitness, no need to spend my weekends in a gymnase club, my small contribution for sustainability... |
Mikej
| | Posted on Thursday, March 18, 2004 - 12:52 pm: |
|
There's a couple of bike shops around here that carry recumbents, and one has a monthly HPV club meeting where I'm thinking I might be able to pick up a used one from. Interesting stuff.
 |
|
