This is yoatmon's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following yoatmon's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
yoatmon
Recent Activity
The "wheel" is constantly being re-invented. A first working prototype employing these principles was introduced from DLR, Germany back in 2004. Because Mercedes have their meat hooks in this innovation, they have successfully prevented market penetration. They want to keep on producing and selling selling their stone age technology and prevent any possible upheavals on the market that may have re-percussions on themselves. http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10084/161_read-8869/year-all/161_page-3/
Conclusions for tomorrow shouldn't be drawn from todays SOA. There are some very interesting and exciting innovations in the pipeline that are bound to bear fruit in the next 5 to 10 years. Here are just two of many more: http://phys.org/news/2015-04-n-type-polymer-fast-battery.html http://phys.org/news/2015-04-ultra-fast-aluminum-battery-safe-alternative.html Once these functional prototypes advance to SOA, any thoughts to H2 technology can be forgotten for mobility purposes. Of course the world is big and harbors plenty of fools. Building fool cells and targeting this paticular group would still be a lucrative business deal.
What a waste of resources for R&D for something that is already available. http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10084/161_read-8869/year-all/161_page-3/ But they'd have to go begging at Mercedes because these duds have their meat-hooks on this innovation.
Hmmm. Could the reduction of weight in this new steering system be defined in grams? The gain in range could probably be defined in meters or centimeters?
@ Peter Dear me, now you're pushing it at Dave. You shouldn't be so harsh to him. After all he may not be a scientist but certainly has other attributes as his name implies Dave(s)mart.
Too late! This one is far ahead of them. http://phys.org/news/2015-03-inexpensive-efficient-bi-metallic-electrocatalysts-floodgates.html
@ mahonj Considering the present SOA, you're probably right. Nevertheless, pollution remains pollution. Implementing a power-to-gas scheme and using that gas for heating purposes would be just as effective and emissions neutral. I would prefer a heat pump with a reversal function making it suitable for heating and AC.
"CMU, Ford, Drexel study suggests Chinese more receptive to adopting BEVs than Americans, regardless of subsidies" I'm sure that the Chinese are not smarter than Americans. Considering the smog density and duration in the larger Chinese cities, it is almost necessary to install radar systems in vehicles to enable orientation. Those walking or cycling need gas masks to overlive a trip from A to B. All in all, they have higher incentives for pollution free modes of mobility - if they are not just prone to commit suicide - than Americans. We Americans have not yet progressed to the brink of self-destruction but we're on a dam'n good way to reach that goal; we're getting closer and closer.
@ Bob Wallace The difference in efficiency would be negligible to near by wheel mounting but the effort and price increase would be considerable.
@ Davemart The special architecture (mechanical and electrical design) of the employed reluctance motor is basically an induction motor that avoids the use of rare earths. The particular design employed by BYD is usually mirrored (stator / rotor); s. e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctance_motor With BYDs mirrored design, it is possible to reduce the number of coils/windings in the stator and reduce the coulombic losses. I suspect that this measure is part of the problem that BYD is encountering. Just a tip from a daft engineer.
The world is full of foolish proponents cheering for "Fool Cells".
"...a power density of 42 kW/kg at an energy density more than 100 Wh/kg." Absolutely nothing exciting about. My Panasonic cells (3300 mAh / 3.6V nom.) have more than double that energy density.
When lead acid battery production started over a century ago, it was in its diapers, where - more or less - it can still be found today. There are several battery chemistries that are more advanced than lead acid; if they were scaled up to true mass production like lead acid, they would also be price compatible. Beyond the battery chemistry, it'd be recommendable to increase the board voltage to 48 to 60V. Also a century ago, the accompanying technology was deem-able for 6 / 12V board voltage. The higher voltage can be easily handled nowadays with many advantages. Apparently, it is difficult for car manufacturers to depart from their stone age mentality.
For general info., Just at this very moment, I weighed a Panasonic 18650 Cell. - weight = 46.2g - nom. V = 3.6 - Ic max = 3300 mah; 3.6V x 3.3A = 11.88wh per cell 1kg = 1000g or 1000g/46.2g = 21.645 (cells) 11.88wh x 21.645 = 257.14 wh/kg
Magnesium has a theoretical energy density double that of Lithium. Additionally, Magnesium is an abundant element which is available worldwide (no OPEC-type monopoly) and its safer than Lithium. I'm placing my bets on Magnesium-Sulphur.
An impressive bit of engineering when compared to a conventional ICE. But compare it with this http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10084/161_read-8869/year-all/161_page-3/ and it becomes too complicated and expensive in production. This solution, as achieved from DLR, is far more simple, cheaper to manufacture and less prone to mechanical failure. The real problem, as I see it, is the involvement of Mercedes in this achievement. The unacceptable attitude of Mercedes is: "Noli turbare circulos meos." (do not disturb my circles) to quote Archimedes. To see this implemented in a mass produced BEV as a REX will more than likely take decades.
@ mahonj Just putting it mildly, I have an extremely strong dislike for monopolies. The power utilities in Europe, particularly in Germany, are all monopolies. I fervently hope, that renewables keep up - better yet - increase their pace and push those monopolies out of business. I can't wait to see all of them pushing daisies.
Theoretically, a lithium air cell would allow the highest possible energy - and power density. A lithium metal electrode bears the inherent problem of reacting with the moisture in the air leading to violent uncontrollable reactions. Various metals, among them aluminum, are foamed for specific applications. Why not foam a lithium metal plate, cover this with graphene and use it as an anode. The spaces between the atoms of the graphene cloak are so small that they do not allow the passage of a H2O molecule making the anode electrode inherently safe. However, ions and electrons are small enough to penetrate this protective cloak. The nano-pores of the metal foam would result in a tremendous surface rendering an extreme high energy density. The cathode would be the oxygen in the air. Such a design would allow a cell of low weight and volume and extremely high power - and energy desnsity. Why not?
Gor! Are you a Muslim or a convert to this hostile religious club? Your rant allows the conclusion that you're affiliated with them.
First successful attempts have been made at spinning CNTs into yarn. This yarn replaced the copper windings in the motor and resulted in considerable weight reduction and thermal losses close to nil. The CNTs are also cheaper than copper. The thermal loss reduction also enables increased mileage. How long will it take before this innovation becomes SOP?
@ EP If you're content with nominal progress, this should be of interest to you. http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/energy-engineering/safe-lithium-batteries-with-a-long-service-life.html
Perhaps this is something that Tesla should have a closer look at. http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/energy-engineering/safe-lithium-batteries-with-a-long-service-life.html
"500 cycles with initial specific capacity of 1,350 mAh/g at C/2 and a cycle decay as low as 0.09%/cycle." 500 x 0.09% = 45% or 65% capacity retention; that's still a long way to go to reach acceptable results.
Aalso, miscanthus needs neither fetilizers nor pesticides; once planted it'll endure for approx. 4 yrs. and can be harvested twice a year.
Yes, the rate at which mechanical improvements for ICEs are being churned out which could have been had some 30 to 40 years ago, is absolutely remarkable.