|
I've spent literally thousands of hours over the last decade researching the options as far as hybrid vehicles, as well as $30,000 pursuing a patent.
I don't spent that kind of money without due diligence, or that amount of time without the same diligence.
The EPA also predicted that you could build a hydraulic hybrid class 2 truck with a gross weight of 7800 pounds that averaged 59 MPG combined. Not sure about that one but the presentation was fairly convincing, but it did include advancements on motor designs that did not exist at the time of the prediction. Tha same prediction estimated that could be accimplished this year 2010.
I have the document if you don't believe me. and can provide you with a photo copy in this thread.
I have already posted a photo of the cumulative losses of electric hybrid regeneration compared to hydraulic regeneration, in a prior thread. EPA documents, not mine. I can post it again.
I went to Next Energy in Detroit and they are pursuing hydraulic hybrids. 4 years ago the wheel to wheel efficiency was 78%. Electric wqas 30%. Their figures, not mine.
By moving the motor to the wheel and accomplishing infinitely variable ratios, you have solved the issue of high speed inefficiency. Wheel speeds of 1000 RPM (over 100 MPH) keep efficiency above 90% in the bent axis pumps the EPA was using. Bent axis pumps are an ancient design dating back to WW2. They are reciprocating pumps and require low pressure circuit levels of 200 PSI to prevent cavitation. Mine is rotary and not reciprocating, low pressure circuit levels could potentially be 80% less.
Guys and Gals I can go on with this for hundreds of pages from memory. If you are serious about really understanding the potential efficiency of hydraulic hybrids, then lets keep it simple. Address each issue that you have a rational concern individually. I can provide evidence to refute your allegations, as well as independent scientific research to back up every claim I have made.
I have spent more time on this than it would require you to get a Masters degree from any University in the country.
My design has addressed every issue you bring up in this discussion. It is based on over 37 years of experience and intimate knowledge of automotive operational systems, by a person whose IQ is the equal to anyone here.
That makes me an authority on the subject of hydraulic hybrids. My design could weigh 1pound and power a bicycle. Parker Hannifin has been sponsoring a contest called the "Chainless Challenge". It's purpose is to get Universities to produce bicycle designs that utilize hydraulic powertrains in a competition to see who can come up with the best configuration.
A "clean sheet of paper"
The technology of infinitely variable transmissions and accumulators specifically designed for automotive applications is fairly new. The EPA produced a test mule passenger car 10years ago that averaged 80 MPG and weighed 3800 pounds.
At the end on their considerable research and development, they basically begged for another design that started from a "clean sheet of paper" as far as power trains for HH vehicles.
That's what I did. That's why I spent the enormous amount of time and a considerable amount of money in pursuit of my dream. That dream becomes an issued patent in about 2 months.
That my friends is the very soul of this forum. To increase our understanding and application of greater efficiency in vehicles. My experience equals or surpasses any other person on this planet in that specific dedication, and I am not mentally handicapped. That does NOT mean my abilities are any greater than any other member of this forum. It merely matches the statement by Einstein that genius is 1% inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. I have paid admission to that group, with obsessive determination to a cause I think has the potential to change transportation as we know it.
I have not come here with ridiculous claims, or flim flam sales pitches, or nefarious schemes to separate anyone here from a single penny.
What I ask is for you to use the brains God gave you and try to understand that there are other options above the status quo. Lack of understanding is our greatest enemy. If we choose to ignore any rational pathway to our common goal, then we risk loosing a race that is planetary, not local.
Nations outside our borders are not limited to specific development pathways, and if they get the jump on us we will be playing catch up again, the same we we had to play catch up with the Japanese when the oil spigots were shut off in 1973.
I will make this statement one more time. If you don't believe what I am saying, at least you should allow me enough of your attention to let me show you what a decade of research has produced. They don't post articles in the Journal of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers to support charlatans.
One of the major engineering schools does not spend a year doing all the research that 8senior engineering students, led by a MIT degreed Doctor of Engineering would accumulate in a year of work, to conclude that the hydraulic option is an effective solution.
Now you can choose to ignore further evidence, or you can follow a natural curiosity I have found to be almost universal in intelligent people, and just try to understand.
I know the potential of this system, several other groups of intelligent people have developed similar systems, some of which are Automotive X prize contestants. (Links posted already).
You see my goal is to provide cheap hybrid transportation. I have covered every reservation you have presented. If you doubt that then lets address those specific issues one at a time. If my evidence does not convince you there is an alternative, then I will not waste my time further in this forum.
With the capital necessary I can provide the design for a car that gets 100 MPG average, weighs 2200 ponds, provides all necessary creature comforts, and cost $15000.
Its that simple, and the design itself is so ridiculously simple its almost unbelievable. Any competent manufacturer can produce it for 66% of the stated selling price, and it could be on the road in 3 years max.
It does not require electric motors or batteries, but they could be the fuel consuming source of accumulator pressure. The could see their range enhanced with a combination of the two systems.
As I said before the source of consumable energy matters not to me. The true objective is to extract the maximum amount of work out of any source. If you don't understand that is the true objective, then I am wasting my time and yours.
regards
Mech
|