01-20-2022, 01:45 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,330
Thanks: 24,452
Thanked 7,393 Times in 4,788 Posts
|
BEV mass and Regeneration efficiency
This has been discussed elsewhere but deserves its own thread.
Any advantage or liability attributed to total vehicle mass appears to diverge when comparing ICE and BEV.
A look at the following will tell the tale:
'Comparison between Battery Electric Vehicles and Internal Combustion Engine vehicles fueled by Electrofuels'
Master's Thesis in Sustainable Energy Systems
Tobias Gustafsson & Anders Johansson
Department of Energy and Environment
Chalmers University of Technology
Gothenburg, Sweden, 2015
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The takeaway for me was that, there is a 'sweet spot' for BEV inertia (vehicle mass ), at which an overall optimum efficiency is achieved, with respect to road load and the amount of energy that may be harvested by regeneration.
https://publications.lib.chalmers.se...621/218621.pdf
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
01-20-2022, 02:05 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
Human Environmentalist
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Thanks: 4,330
Thanked 4,488 Times in 3,451 Posts
|
I didn't read it, but what is the theory saying it can be more efficient to have a heavier BEV?
At least with ICE there is a theory that having a denser vehicle can help extend the glide portion of a pulse and glide, and ICE become more efficient with more load.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-20-2022, 02:55 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,330
Thanks: 24,452
Thanked 7,393 Times in 4,788 Posts
|
saying
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
I didn't read it, but what is the theory saying it can be more efficient to have a heavier BEV?
At least with ICE there is a theory that having a denser vehicle can help extend the glide portion of a pulse and glide, and ICE become more efficient with more load.
|
When every other consideration is made, one will discover that there is an optimum inertia for any particular BEV vehicle, from which its momentum will optimize the amount of regen that can be harvested during deceleration.
Lighter you lose.
Heavier you lose
A 'Goldilocks' mass.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
|
|
|
01-20-2022, 03:04 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Toyoland
Posts: 149
Thanks: 64
Thanked 51 Times in 44 Posts
|
In theory, relative recuperation efficiency (per 1kg) should be higher for heavier vehicle.
But absolute numbers should be less.
__________________
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to alexshock For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-20-2022, 03:25 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
Human Environmentalist
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Thanks: 4,330
Thanked 4,488 Times in 3,451 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
When every other consideration is made, one will discover that there is an optimum inertia for any particular BEV vehicle, from which its momentum will optimize the amount of regen that can be harvested during deceleration.
Lighter you lose.
Heavier you lose
A 'Goldilocks' mass.
|
Still not getting it. It takes x amount of energy to accelerate y mass to z speed. Recovering that momentum is less than 100% efficient, meaning it would always be more efficient to reduce the amount of mass accelerated in the first place.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-20-2022, 03:42 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
Corporate imperialist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,268
Thanks: 273
Thanked 3,572 Times in 2,836 Posts
|
I do stuff like haul bags of coal, wood pellets with my leaf. Heavier does not appear to be more efficient at all.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to oil pan 4 For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-20-2022, 04:08 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,330
Thanks: 24,452
Thanked 7,393 Times in 4,788 Posts
|
relative
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexshock
In theory, relative recuperation efficiency (per 1kg) should be higher for heavier vehicle.
But absolute numbers should be less.
|
Yes, regen efficiency must be balanced against all competing criteria in the mix.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
|
|
|
01-20-2022, 04:15 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,330
Thanks: 24,452
Thanked 7,393 Times in 4,788 Posts
|
always
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Still not getting it. It takes x amount of energy to accelerate y mass to z speed. Recovering that momentum is less than 100% efficient, meaning it would always be more efficient to reduce the amount of mass accelerated in the first place.
|
'Always' violates the specific attributes possessed by BEVs.
80% of 'braking' kinetic energy can be recovered into the battery of a BEV.
Zero braking energy of an ICE vehicle can be recovered into its fuel tank.
Also, the BSFC-e of a BEV is around 3.5 X lower than an ICE, so they're only using a fraction of the energy to accelerate a vehicle back up to speed.
The mathematics is significantly different.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
|
|
|
01-20-2022, 04:23 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,330
Thanks: 24,452
Thanked 7,393 Times in 4,788 Posts
|
does not appear
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4
I do stuff like haul bags of coal, wood pellets with my leaf. Heavier does not appear to be more efficient at all.
|
There's no implication that it wouldn't.
Volvo is the only company to test and report. And all data reflect only 'passenger car' applications, not towing.
If you were hauling, loaded, between Cloudcroft and Hope, that would be interesting data, compared to dead-heading empty, uphill.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
|
|
|
01-20-2022, 04:52 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
Human Environmentalist
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Thanks: 4,330
Thanked 4,488 Times in 3,451 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
'Always' violates the specific attributes possessed by BEVs.
80% of 'braking' kinetic energy can be recovered into the battery of a BEV.
Zero braking energy of an ICE vehicle can be recovered into its fuel tank.
Also, the BSFC-e of a BEV is around 3.5 X lower than an ICE, so they're only using a fraction of the energy to accelerate a vehicle back up to speed.
The mathematics is significantly different.
|
Some fraction of x is always less than x, even if that fraction is very high. It would always be more efficient to avoid spending energy than attempting to recover it.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
|
|
|