Originally Posted by Old Mechanic
Ah "stupid" the name calling that disguises the ignorance of the person making the post.
I did not call it a Hydraulic Hybrid, it was many different organizations that apparently your lack of knowledge, reading, or understanding, of the system was your justification in hiding your ignorance with mud slinging and name calling.
But, for the sake of not letting this thread degrade into real stupidity. Lets look at your position.
A series hybrid is one that uses a single method of propulsion, which is the wheel motor in a HH. Now you could bypass the accumulator and drive the vehicle directly with hydraulic motors and not use any accumulator. The two sources of energy to drive the wheels make it a hybrid. Without the accumulator it is not a hybrid.
Maybe that was the pint your were trying to make, but you should drop the stupid comment because it makes you seem ignorant.
The term hybrid by definition is two sources of energy. You could argue that the engine is the only source of energy so it is not a hybrid, however when you take that position you would also have to eliminate the Insight and Prius in your descriptions of what is a "Hybrid", since both derive all of their energy from the liquid fuel you pour in the tank (in their original configurations).
At least in their stock configuration they have no provision for outside replenishment of anything but liquid fuel.
If you want to take the position that there are no hybrids (by your ignorance driven definition) then it doesn't matter to me, but you should consider the fact that calling someone stupid because of your own pitiful knowledge of the design just makes your position seem driven by stupidity since typically ignorance is curable.
Infinitely variable transmissions allow you to adjust the load on the engine by reducing its RPM to the balance point. If the load from driving the vehicle is insufficient then you store the energy in the accumulator. Once that level of storage is at maximum, kill the engine and drive the vehicle with accumulator pressure alone. That's self contained pulse and glide without speed variations.
Can your electric hybrid do that at 60 MPH? Maybe it they put a $10,000 battery in it, but even then it will not get good mileage because of the total losses through too many energy transformations, even when they are individually efficient, as well as the weight of the battery you must carry along.
That's pulse and glide, and you can do that with a hydraulic accumulator, BECAUSE of the total efficiency of the system. You can not do that with electric hybrids, unless you want to keep your speeds in the range of a fast bicycle.
If you want to brag about mileage and how good a hypermiler you are, just remember to also include the average speed of the trips you take. Any decent driver with 5 minutes of training can get 80 MPG in a 90 Civic if they average 22 MPH.
My average speeds are easily twice that amount, and in a lot of cases closer to 3 times that amount. My average mileage is between 55 and 60, with a lot of 300 mile one day trips that no BEV will do for at least another couple of decades without some major battery breakthrough that we have been waiting for, for 100 years.
If you want a $30,000 car that has a 100 mile range buy a Leaf, in a year or so, and use no oil whatsoever, if you can afford a part time car for $30k.
If you think when those BEVs get into the mainstream it is really going to cost you 2 cents a mile you are dreaming. Oh yes BEVs are not hybrids and it will be soon that you will be paying some form of road tax on your BEV, believe it.
Anyone here driven a BEV 20,000 miles? 50,000 miles? how about 100,000?
I think if you look at it rationally there is definitely a place for BEVs, I support their development.
I also understand their limitations. In a job hungry market a wage earner can not afford to limit their commute. They can also not afford to sell their house at a loss and move closer to a job that might not exist in a couple of years.
I would think from some of the responses that some followers of this thread have not read the linked articles in my first post.
They key component in a successful HH is the in wheel drive. Another key component is the overall simplicity of the system and its ability to capture and reapply huge amounts of energy with a virtually unlimited life expectancy, while being capable of reapplying those same amounts of energy at efficiencies exceeding 80% (again impossible with batteries and electric motors).
How much storage do your really need?
The Volt gives you 40 miles with a 400 pound fuel storage capability. The Leaf gives you 100 miles. Battery storage is still the achilles heel of the electric car, the same way it was the achilles heel 100 years ago.
Give me 300 miles for 200 pounds of battery storage with a 10 year life expectancy (required in California) and I will own only a BEV, especially if curbside charging is available (say in 15 minutes). It would be the only car I need, instead of two cars, one for short distance and the other for trips.
No one knows how long it will be before that is available, but at 59 I may not see it in my lifetime.
The first generation of HH will be a launch assist axle with a small accumulator, in the rear axle of a small FWD car. It will get better city mileage than highway mileage, whicle retaining the conventional power train.
The next step will be to use the same launch assist axle to pulse and glide the vehicle (engine on-engine off)at most speeds up to about 60 MPH, while still retaining the conventional powertrain.
This can be done with a cost to benefit ratio that pays for itself in months, not years.
As the technology matures the dedicated (no conventional powertrain) can be the next eveolution of the system. When you rationally consider the components eliminated the cost is actually less than conventional and the benefits immediate with no break even point to even consider.
Read the links, thats not my data.
regards
Mech
|