Trip to Va Tech #2
Mid semester report from the senior students on my hydraulic in wheel drive design.
I won't be back until Saturday afternoon. I will fill you all in on their findings. They have focused on designing a system that could be used in a Dodge Sprinter van. Each in wheel drive motor should be capable of about 60 HP energy conversion and brake energy recovery. They have also decided to make the prototype capable of adjustment of the stroke position which is a key component of a functional unit. Previously they had thought they would produce a fixed stroke position design to test. Talk with yall Saturday. regards gary |
how did it go?
|
Yes, keep us informed. I'd love to see how this worked out for ya'll.
I'm doing something similar for the BUV club here at UC, but am going to power a driveshaft on a small pickup's rear clip. Getting hydraulic steering and switchable 3x3 vs 2x3 with only a 10hp input is the interesting part right now. |
Yea, I am real interested in this as I am sure others are also. A buddy has a diesel powered Dodge Sprinter van used in his business.
|
2 Attachment(s)
Both meetings went very well. The students prepared a 40 page document where they studied various configurations. They are planning to build a 1.5 HP portable test prototype that will use 110 volt power to store energy in an accumulator then release it to see how much they can recover.
The meeting in DC was more related to the financial strategy and the ability to acqquire federal funding for further development. In general I think both meetings lived up to my expectations, and the second meeting could be summed up with the statement that I should not spend any more money on this, because funding should be available. Attached is a document that explains my overall goals which is to achieve the mileage figures at the bottom of the chart for the vehicle in the description. 66.7 MPG city and 58.1 highway for a class 2 truck. It requires a system efficiency of 80% for regeneration. It also requires a dramatic change in engine design, and overall reductions in weight, wth improvements in aerodynamics. The core of the package where my design applies is in the drive system, using either an accumulator or a flywheel, with consideration to both especially with cost as a factor. Bottom line is a small Corolla sized sedan with 80 highway and 100 city mileage figures. Those could rise easily if CD could be made to be .19 or lower. regards gary |
2 Attachment(s)
The mileage projection chart.
Gary |
just to clarify
class 2 truck? is that an s-10 or a silverado (I just used chevy as an example)? I would assume a small compact truck like an s-10. even at that, those numbers are unbelievable. if you could make it into a new vehicle with minimal cost. if you could keep it around the 20k range or even have a retrofit that would go on existing vehicles (that would take some work) all in all, if you can pull this off, you could be in the runnings for the automotive X-prize. the idea is great. *edit* I think you attached the wrong pic to the first post (the first of the second) it is a pic of your old car (I think it was a 34 ford, I might be wrong) |
2 Attachment(s)
Sorry Beef look at the weight. These are EPA estimates, not my figures. Base mileage is 15 and 21 (not including fractions)
Class 2 trucks 9000 LBS assuming that is gross, but it drops to 7600. They are predicting an engine efficiency of 42% current diesels approach 41%powertrain at 85%, and regeneration at 80 %. The real advantage of my design is simplicity and low manufacturing cost, as well as much lower per vehicle parts count. Moving the transmission to each wheel at the same weight as the brake components you are replacing, while eliminating the rest of the powertrain components. My original flywheel-enigne design should be able to actually beat their 42% projection and actually approach 58% like some of the free piston HCCI engines, while providing flywheel storage to eliminate the need for any accumulator. This function is incorporated into the engines transformation into a flywheel. Pancaked on the other side of the engine is the transmission which directly provides fluid pressure to each wheel motor, but also serves to store energy in every regeneration event. The engine either runs at max BSFC, or destrokes itself (almost instantly) into a free spining flywheel, or an accumulator can be used with any conventional engine (but accumulators are expensive). First step Take a conventional FWD car like my VX, replace the rear hubs with my design and use the rear wheels to regenerate deceleration forces, as well as allowing the engine to cycle on and off at max BSFC when cruising. Now you have a vehicle that hypermiles itself. Flywheel or accumulator for storage in rear spare tire well. Run flat tires. 75 MPG average Second step Dedicated (minus conventional powertrain) flywheel (or accumulator) storage that separates the engine from the powertrain. All drive energy comes from storage with supplemental storage energy replenishment from cycling engine on and off. Acceleration times now rival braking distances and times. 0-60 in 6seconds or less and less than 130 feet to achieve 60 MPH on stored energy alone, but only for one event. Totally reversible process. 100 MPG average Third step Dedicated flywheel-engine (either one or the other, but always a flywheel). Engine placed horizontally in an enlarged front corssmember that also serves as a scattershield in case of catastrophic engine failure. Engine has no cooling or induction system, operates in HCCI mode with open throttle, and multi fuel compression ignition capability, approaching or exceeding free piston designs rated in the mid 50% ranges. 130 MPG average As the design progresses the weight of the vehicle will drop as it does in the graph due to elimination of heavy powertrain and cooling system components, also indiction system components. Final evolution should weight about 75% or first config. Mileage claims could actually improve with dedicated efforts at reducing aero drag to the minimum possible. Hydraulic drive systeam also have capability to reduce vehicle gorund clearance on highways at higher speeds, while increasing it significantly in adverse enviornments like deep snow. mud, etc. In the event electric drives become practical or desirable for local in city type 0 emissions operation, modules could be interchangeable from combustion power storage repleneshment or dedicated electric replenishment. regards gary |
Quote:
You could use a compact pickup. You could start with a RWD truck and use the axle from the 4wd version, or start with a 4wd truck and remove the transfer case and front driveshaft. Then hook your regen up in place of the front driveshaft. You might be able to house the vx-spare-tire-sized flywheel/accumulator in some of the space freed up where the T-case was...but if not, and if you can't find a decent place to put it, there's always the truck bed... but Ford managed to fit 65 miles worth of batteries under the Ranger EV. |
Cow, the idea is to keep his original drive wheels and use the rears as a proof of concept. If you use a motor that's fine with bi directional fluid flow, it will become a pump when the vehicle is coming to a stop (read: he's 'engine' braking with the hydraulic motors attached to his wheels). This goes to an accumulator/resivior of some kind, which is then released on demand.
By using a bypass valve he can drop the system pressure to nill after the initial acceleration uses up the pressure in the system, so the motor is free wheeling, and when he goes to stop the bypass valve closes and the motors start pumping fluid into the resivior. On acceleration the fluid is allowed to flow again, but going from the resivior to the motor, thus helping to power the vehicle. That's one of the awesome things about hydraulic transmissions and drives - the power unit can also be an extremely effective brake and storage devise ;) There's a decent amount of math involved. Right now I'm prepared to murder my team mates. |
The key component is the variable displacement feature of the in wheel drive motor-pumps. They can be changed from 0 stroke to any stroke position within their design range. They can also be reversed to regenerate and provide a reverse "gear". This displacement change can occur as fast as you can apply your brakes in your car.
The diameter of the cylinders and their maximum stroke are sized to allow the pump function to capture the regenerative energy up to the limit of the tires traction with the road. Regeneration would continue until the wheels stopped completely, then the stroke position would go neutral until you accelerated again. This is at all 4 wheels, both acceleration and regeneration. With the best available tires this car could out accelerate any 2 wheel drive car on the planet! Think of it like being able to downshift you car into first gear at 100 MPH and spin a flywheel with that energy or store it in a 5000 PSI accumulator. This means you have the ability to stop at your maximum rate, and also accelerate at the same rate. Imagine your car could accelerate at the same rate of acceleration as its best braking distance. You are talking 0-60 in about 130 feet! Thats possible with the engine turned off! However it is only available once. The amount of energy wasted in a 60-0 stop is the same as the energy required to maintain 60 MPH for .7 mile. The ability to run the engine only in its best BSFC range means you can double the mileage with that single fact in mind. Energy provided by the engine can be applied to directly driving the vehicle as well as storage simultaneously. Eliminating idling saves 13% of total fuel consumption. You dont need a conventional starter motor, the hydraulic accumulator starts the engine. You only need to generate electrical power to run your accessories. You dont need a large battery to start your engine. The battery could be 1/4 the size. Regardless of the storage level percentage you can always apply the power necessary to the wheels to maintain any speed, because you can constantly fadjust the stroke of the wheel motors to extract the same amount of power regardless of the level of available energy stroage. Think of it as a bank in which you store 100s of horsepower seconds of energy. Your maximum is 1000, minimum is 300. If your energy requirement is 10 HP you could maintain that level for 70 seconds without any fuel consumed during that period. Then the engine replenishes the 700 Horsepower seconds by producing 100 HP for 7 seconds. The size and maximum power of your engine can be varied greatly, with the only result being the time required to restore the 700 HP seconds of energy would be less with a more powerful engine. You need 100 HP from the engine at a RPM range from 1200 to 2500 RPM, but you do not need to design the engine to run at any higher speed than 2500 RPM. A single port and injector supplies all the air and fuel to the engine, while a single exhaust port allows you to keep catalist temps high as well as transfer exhaust heat to preheat the induction charge. The engine would be fairly large displacement, probably 200 cubic inches, but would never run above 2500 RPM regardless of the circumstances. No idling, no part throttle constant speeds, and no necessity for the components you normally have on your car to control the engine power production. This same vehicle would be capable of accelerating to say 80 MPH, then stop, reaccelerate to 70 MPH, stop, reaccelerate to 63 MPH, stop, reaccelerate to 55 MPH, stop, and on and on>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING AT ALL> as long as your storgae was at maximum when you began the series of stops and starts. I am hoping to achieve 85% regeneration efficiency, but 80% would be fine. 90 % would be even better but you have to have two transformations of energy and storage so the overall efficiency is the multiple of three separate component efficiencies. Each component would have to have efficiencies of over 96% individually. Very tough to do but not impossible. If I wanted to spend the many minutes it would take I could pump an accumulator up with my legs and accelerate your car to 80 MPH with this system. Could be used to limp to the gasstation if you ran out of fuel. It would be a whole lot more efficient than pushing your car. You could also start the engine with a totally dead battery. regards gary |
in a way, it works like an air compressor.
I am just trying to make sure I understand it. the accumulator is set at a given pressure and if it falls below that pressure the motor (car engine) kicks in to get back up to that pressure but the goal of the motor is to keep that said pressure. the wheels are actually ran off of the pressure that has been accumulated. I know that I have "dumbed it up" but after reading your posts, my head was kind of hurting a little so I tried to relate it to something much simpler just to make sure I understand it. obviously there is a lot more going on there than just what I have said. I like how you use the value hp/sec. that is pretty cool. I wonder, with your design, can you release all of it at one time? or at least at very high quantities? if you have 1000 horsepower seconds to play with, can you release 400 hp for 3 seconds or even 1000 hp for 1 second or maybe even 2000 hp for 1/2 a second. I realize that traction would be a big issue with that type of power at the rear wheels, I was just curious. |
Quote:
|
I agree. Its something like 70% of the braking is done by the front wheels. The rears don't do much. I like the idea of using a 4wd vehicle and disconnecting the front axle. You can buy an old 4wd pickup, or an old AWD Astro relatively cheap and have a cheap, simple vehicle to prove the concept, then once that is done you can work on refining it and engineering it into a newer vehicle. Personally I like the idea of using an old AWD Chevy Astro (or maybe an AWD Subaru Outback wagon?). Lots of room in the back for the extra equipment while experimenting. Once its tuned and refined the equipment can be located underneath the vehicle.
-Jay |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Therefore, I suggest attaching the proof of concept system to the front wheels. Perhaps there's something fundamental I'm missing here, possibly I failed to pay attention while reading an earlier post. |
Not only does weight transfer forward, but in most vehicles the weight of the engine is directly on top of the front wheels helping them keep traction. The rears will skid easily because there's no weight there holding those wheels on the ground. This could be dangerous driving in rain/snow/ice/wet leaves. it would be the equivalent of pulling the handbrake while trying to stop or slow down in low traction situations. There is more energy available from the front axle without breaking traction, or creating an unsafe condition.
-Jay |
Quote:
You are - the weight over the wheels, and how much of the braking they do proportionally does not matter. This is taking rotational motion and turning a pump. The wheel powering the motor could be on the front bumper, the rear wheels, dead middle, and it would still make the same amount of pressure and flow rate over the same period of time given the same deceleration rate assuming the wheel doesn't skid. The energy doesn't move away from the rear wheels - they're attached to the chassis, which is moving, so all 4 wheels are spinning. Remember this isn't anywhere close to threshold braking at all - 8% regeneration capacity judging by his charts, which won't be anywhere close to locking up the wheels. |
Quote:
Hydraulics are not a 0% to 100% instantly unless you want them to be. They allow for a very precise fluid flow, and thus braking power. There's no reason to fear this setup more than a rear disk or rear drum setup in those conditions, assuming that both are properly designed. |
Quote:
|
I see the point now, but I still think that there is far more energy available to be recovered from the front.
-Jay |
Quote:
Hydraulics make a heck of a parking brake to boot :) The only issue I think he'll run across is finding the pump(s) and motors. They're going to be very very very heavy duty custom builds, which won't be anywhere near cheap. For my project a few years down the road I'm working on making my Saturn RWD with a 6 speed that's hydraulically powered from the factory 4 banger engine. Not as nifty as 4 wheel hydrostatic driven wheels, but it'll be a lot more fun to tear through the gears :D |
The regenerative braking efficiency is listed on the chart at 80-85%.
Gas electric hybrids get about 30% back, just a little more than 1/3 of the hydraulic system. The new component is the in wheel IVT (infinitely variable) pump-motor. Its cost when in mass production will be almost identical to the brake components you no longer need, and you will never wear out your brakes again. Moving the drive directly to each wheel (the second stage of development) means you can now design the system to apply the exact amount of power to each wheel that is necessary to reach the limit of the tires traction with the ground. Remember I said 0-60 in 130 feet. How many cars do you know of that can do that? And that is on accumulated storage alone. You can do that rate of acceleration ONCE without the engine even running, not even idling (which it will never do anyway). You don't need it more than once, so why add weight and cost to do it more than once. Try this, drive your car using only the emergency brake for stopping. We drive conservatively as hypermilers anyway. I guarantee you I can drive my daily trip using only the emergency brake on my Honda. Tiny little drums are all I need because I try not to use my brakes at all. My design eliminates brakes altogether (in the conventional sense), with the exception of an emergency brake in case of a catastrophic system failure. Remember the key to this stage of evolution. By retrofitting this system to a car like my VX, you are only progressing to stage 1, which is Launch assist. Focus on the assist definition. The system will be engineered to only provide and recover the power to the rear wheels that they can handle as far as traction is concerned. If you want to accelerate faster than that lmit you use the engine and the front wheels to accelerate faster, but in doing so you waste a lot more fuel. When cruising at a constant speed the rear wheels (in the VX example) would be more than adequate to maintain any reasonable speed. If you need to accelerate uphill on an interstate on ramp with a full load of passengers, in heavy traffic, you would have to add engine power to do so safely. Sure the system could be retrofitted to almost any vehicle, but if you try to do so through the existing powertrain you must run the drive pump-motors at much higher RPMs which is where the current designs loose a significant amount of efficiency, from 94 down to 75 %. That eliminates that configuration as a reasonable solution. In wheel motor speeds of 1000 RPM would mean vehicle speeds in excess of 80 MPH. Splitting the power requirements to all 4 wheels individually makes a lot more sense when you consider that each wheel only has to provide 1/4 of the acceleration forces. You have also eliminated the necessity of a power teansmission components to carry all of the engines power to the wheels. Thats hundreds of parts no longer needed. In our cars we reduce the propshaft RPM through the differential. By moving the transmissions work to the wheels themselves you have low RPMs (much more efficient) as well as 4 wheel regeneration. This is in the 2nd evolution, when the engines connection to the wheels is completely eliminated. The difference between stage 1 and stage 2 is 40% stage one mileage improvement, and 80% stage 2 improvement. Launch assist could be available by the end of 2009 (stage 1) with stage 2 within 18 months after that. The whole concept is based on the potential for low risk implementation and positive cash flow from sales, to finance stage 2 and 3. This makes the system especially attractive to manufacturers, which is crucial to them accepting the design and producing it in huge quantities. Stage two is 4 wheel drive, as well as regeneration, something few if any hybrids offer. Regeneration can continue to 0 vehicle speed at all 4 wheels, once you have progressed to stage two. In stage two you are still using a conventional engine for power, but like the Prius, you are running the engine only in its sweet spot (best BSFC range), because it no longer has anything to do with the power applied to the wheels. The engine replaces lost pressure in the accumulator, if you are using accumulator storage, or spins up the flywheel, if you are using flywheel storage. The choice depends on cost comparisons of flywheels or accumulators. I believe accumulators would be more efficient, but flywheels would have less of a weight penalty. Each choice has advantages and disadvantages, but the principle deciding factor is cost. The whole concept is based on the belief that if you can accomplish this with a 20% reduction in parts PER VEHICLE, you can produce a basic very inexpensive vehicle (say 10K new) that gets ungodly gas mileage, with may fewer parts that wear out and require reapir. Its win win from every perspective. Even the manufacturers can make money on cheap cars. Of course they will want to use the same system on more expensive cars but the object is to make the car inexpensive and so simple it would amaze you. __________________________________________________ _______________ Now lets talk stage 3. This is where you go after the greatest loss in energy, which is engine efficiency. Gas engines currently peak at 35% Diesels currently peak at 41% Electric motors are approaching 90% The largest diesels on the planet are about 50% Free piston engines that convert combustion pressure directly into hydraulic fluid pressure have reached theoretical efficiencies of 58%. My enigne design has the potential to surpass 58%, because even a free piston engine is a reciprocating engine. My design is not a reciprocating engine. New engine designs are Billion dollar commitments. No manufacturer will touch that kind of development cost without proving the concept with many prototypes and destructive testing. My design uses the mass of the engine itself to create flywheel storage of rotational energy. The engine transforms itself into a flywheel. 250 pounds of rotating engine mass only needs to be accleerated from 1000 to 2600 RPM to store the enegy necessary to accelerate a 2000 pound vehicle from 0-60 MPH on that 1600 RPm increase in RPM. We are not talking about high speed flywheels with the potential for catastrophic disintegration. Maximum flywheel speeds would be 3500 RPM in generated speed with max speeds approaching 8000 RPM if regeneration was necessary at the instant when the 3500 RPM point had been reached. In other words you are travelling down thee road and your flywheel has just been accelerated to 3500 RPM and some moron pulls out in front of you and you have to make a panic stop. The regeneration energy would increase the flywheel speed to 8000 RPM. The engine also eliminates the need for any accumulator or separate flywheel for storage. Now your system consists of the engine-flywheel (one component) a master IVT pump motor, integral with the engine, and 4 in wheel drive regenerating motors in each wheel. You no longer need any throttle control, cooling system, transmission, prop shaft, axles, differentials. Only a single fuel injector is necessary becasue all air comes in through a single port. No valve train, because the rotating cylinders pass over ports that allow air in and exahust out (2 ports). Now you have reached stage 3 where the potential for fuel economy should actually exceed the figures in the tables provided. You also have a vehicle that, by design, hypermiles itself to perfection. As you improve the aerodynamics the mileage grows proportionately. This does not happen in conventional drivetrains, because as you improve aero, the engine eifficincy actually drops becasue you have lowered the sustained demand. There are two pedals, the right one is the go pedal, while the left is the slow pedal. Both feet are on the pedals all the time. Push the right foot to go faster, left foot to slow down. The pedals are gimballed so when you push one down the other rises, like the rudder controls on older aircraft. This is real stuff, and its getting damn close to implementation. regards gary |
I want to know more about stage 1. the one that you can retrofit onto an existing car for just the launch.
you said possibly available in 2009. was that a retro fit onto a vehicle? what would be the cost? I really like the idea. it isn't that I don't like your other ideas but I work in design (electronic design, PAs to be exact) and I know how schedules go. time lines get stretched out and some projects get dropped all together (not that I expect that of yours). I think that if you could increase someones mileage by 40% over what they are doing right now, that would sell like hotcakes (depending on price). I for one would be interested if the system was relatively inexpensive. keep us posted. hopefully one day, the hydraulic car will be available at our nearest dealer. this is good stuff. I can't wait to see how this turns out |
Here are pictures of the model I built. The outer rim rotates while everything inside the black shaded ring is stationary.
The three photos show 3 postions: Lowest foreward gear Neutral Lowest Reverse (or highest regeneration)gear Any position between these maximums creates an effectively higher gear. The movements of the adjustable journal are very subtle, but the consequences are dramatic. If you apply 5000 PSI pressure to each piston as it and its corresponding cylinder pass over the high pressure supply port (in the adjustable journal-not shown in the model). You transfer that force to the outer locating point of each piston. If the cylinder has a surface area of 1 square inch then you would be creating about 800 foot pounds of rotational torque directly on the outermost portion of the rim, on EACH drive wheel. As the wheel starts to spin and you want to go to a higher gear, you reduce the stroke position and that is all that is necessary to go to a higher gear. Highest gear would be the slightest amount of adjustment from the neutral position. Sitting still you are in neutral. When you want to accelerate you move the journal to a position that matches the desired rate of acceleration. Regeneration is simply reversing the stroke position. In fact, if you continue to apply that same sroke position the vehicle would actually go backwards after coming to a complete stop. As you regenerate braking energy and the pressure rises, you simply reduce the stroke position to compensate. Look at the model and understand it is basically an axle with a hub rotating around that axle. The diameter of the axle is enlarged to about 4 inches to allow an offset hole to be drilled through the axle, which allows the journal and its shaft to pass through the axle for external adjustment as well as providing a rotary valve for supply and return fluid passageways. Think of it as a "smart" axle, like smart bombs. The smart portion is the 4 rotary cylinders and their pistons and the adjustable journal. The clyinders are highlighted with red paint, while the pistons are silver. Notice the lack of connecting rods, because the pistons and cylinders can each pivot on their respective end locations. I'll be back later to answer other questions. Pictures in next post, sorry I chose quick reply. regards gary |
6 Attachment(s)
Pics.
gary |
Gary, you may want to try contacting Peraves about use of their superball motor.
https://kugelmotor.peraves.ch/Bilder/IAA_Flyer-E1.jpg https://kugelmotor.peraves.ch/Bilder/IAA_Flyer-E2.jpg https://www.promotor.nl/published/prm...7_enlarged.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAE9g_CV-eY |
Quote:
Quote:
The rear wheels are fine for accelerating and maintaining speed. That's well proven. I don't think you have to worry about how much acceleration power they can handle. What's the F/R weight distribution on a Civic VX? It can't be any more front-heavy than a pickup truck. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think changing the interface will hinder sales. People want the interface they're used to, and need it, and will call your system dangerous if you insist on changing the interface (and, at least while it's new, it WILL be dangerous -- people will not adapt their reflexes). |
Quote:
|
The ONLY reason why front braking works better than rear is because the fronts have more traction from the weight transfer and resist locking better.
Rear driven wheels tend to work better in terms of pure acceleration for the same reason. Ya'll are getting too tied up in which wheels do what - if it spins, it turns the motor, which is all that needs to be done for this. Also, holycow, he's not talking about the flywheel attached directly to the engine (this would jack up engine RPM's incredibly fast and probably toast your motor) Since the 40's people have been experimenting with putting a massive flywheel horizontal under the floor of a car and using that to store energy. I'm pretty sure that's what he's referring to on the flywheel storage device. Yes, it will have some decent gyroscopic effects, but not on the lateral plane so your steering, acceleration, and braking would all remain relatively unaffected. The only 2 major issues with implementing hydraulics on the road are these: 1) Maintenance. People are freaking lazy, the system will be contaminated, pumps and motors will fry, all because somebody didn't stick to a maintenance schedule. That's not even counting leaking connections, bad welds or castings, or dry rotting hoses and the chances for a catastrophic failure. When most people can't remember when they changed their antifreeze last, I don't think that's the market to target a mass production hydraulic drive. B)Potentially injuring someone if a resivior tank blows and sends shrapnel through the interior. |
Quote:
Edit: Well, he did talk about a separate flywheel for stage 1, but that wasn't what I was responding to when I was concerned with gyroscopic effects. |
Torque was compensated for in the P38 with counterotating props. A flywheel storage system could have a low speed pump-motor with geared planetary high speed flywheels, half rotating in opposing directions of the other half. Spin a top on the surface of a plate. Wallk around with the plate. Throw the spinning top in the air and catch it in the plate. It keeps spinning.
No maintanance necessary. When is the last time you lost traction in a puddle of hydraulic fluid leaking from any one of hundreds of vehicles that already have hydraulic systems and travel the highways daily? Torque can also be controlled easily with long torque rods that distribute the force over a larger radius. Flywheels are one method of storage, accumulators are the other. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. Both are nearly three times as efficient as battery electric hybrids. Read the EPA hydraulic hybrids documents, look at their vehicle prototypes. Designed by Ford, Eaton, Parker Hannifin, and many other companies. They do not share your concerns. The points about dangerous situations seem rather rediculous to me anyway. No brakes to wear out or fail. I have seen people drive cars into my shop that were soo stupid they drove the car with bad rear brakes intil the caliper piston was rubbing on the rotor, until it ground itself down and fell out on the road. This is your "better system". Try 500,000 miles and not a single set of brake pads. No 30 gallon gas tanks, or CNG cylinders like Pickens is advocating. You are already riding around in a bomb, if you want to take that kind of negative prespective. Hydraulics are used in construction extensively, heard about anyone getting sliced in half by a leak. We can strap a man to a multi million pound pile of rocket fuel and blast him to the moon, but he wont survive a storage container of less than ten gallons at 5000 PSI under two layers of protective materials! Seen any exploding accumulators in aircraft? This design is not being criticized by engineers as a rolling bomb. HolyCow, you can put the design anywhere you want. The problem with retrofitting anything, is you are throwing away what you already paid for, buying new components, and paying labor to install them. You need to integrate any retrofit with existing anitlock brakes and traction control which requires new computers and programming. I used my car as an example because it is available, and has no issues with integration with ABS or TC. A means of demonstrating stage 1, to proove the design advantages. Think like a manufacturer for a minute, then you can understand the three stages. Go directly to stage 3 and make every car on the road obsolete in 3 years. The used car market collapses. Road tax revenues plunge. Oil companies are left with billions of dollars of unused machinery. The whole automotive sales and repair infrastructure will be affected dramatically. You don't find friends when you start rocking their boat, and threatening thier economic security. I worked on cars for 60,000 hours and I know a better mousetrap when I am looking at it. I also realize that 100,000 other "dreamers" with better mousetraps have tried before me. I have studied and worked on cars for over 40 years, and I know how far the development has progressed. The key missing component is exactly what we are talking about. The objective is clear, make the vehicle hypermile itself, while leaving no evidence of that visible to any outside observer. Look at Basjoos' aero mods. As he reduces the aero drag on his car, his engine needs to do less work and becomes less efficient. My system does the exact opposite. Keeps the engine running at only its best efficiency regardless of the lower power demands. It simply runs less and the stored energy drives the car further. regards gary |
Gary - most of the hydraulics you see on America's roadways are for PTO's, and run at relatively low pressures and volumes. They are not used for primary drivetrains on the road at this point in time en masse.
There are plenty of obsticals to overcome - I was NOT claiming that hydraulics are touchy feely things that explode if they're looked at wrong, just that they need proper maintenance. You RARELY see massive failure of construction and airliner fleet vehicles because they're properly maintained - the average American is a flipping idiot who doesn't understand why overheating brake rotors is a bad thing to do. Those are the people that it should NOT be marketed as. You're reading too much into something that's not there bud. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.