First drawing of RIDE prototype vehicle

[botsapper]

Been reading and speculating about these pneumatic/hydraulic hybrid motors for years. Here's the French inventor with a air-piston engine and his evolving vehicle prototypes. An Italian engineer's very light air-rotary piston engine used in many applications. And an enigmatic but very interesting hydraulic engine called Gigadron drive. Good luck on your next-gen project. It would be very interesting to see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3KFihl8u6U

Automotive - Gig high density thermo-hydraulic power for green, safe VTOL aircraft, land transport, electricity, air-con & atmospheric drinking water.

[kach22i]

Nice video.

[jime57]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

For your consideration. The drawing is 10 inches long, scale is 1/15th.
Length 12 feet 6 inches, width 5 feet. Should match the ideal shape almost perfectly. Sides will be vertical for the first 18 inches, then match the curvature of the drawing in the vertical.

regards
Mech

Very interesting design. Will you be able to register the vehicle in Virginia? Is there a "prototype" or "motorcycle" regulation which will allow you to get tags?

[user removed]

Jim, my plan is to register it as a motorcycle. I have 5 of which 2 will probably never be on the road. Either one can be titled and registered. I might look into the custom built avenue, but in either case it should pass Va motorcycle requirements.

Lets see if this works.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Ride122609/videos

This is the first functional prototype running on air.

regards
Mech

[user removed]

Virginia Tech assigned the design to a class of 8 engineering students who calculated the stress points and potential power development. With 3 pistons and a piston surface area of 1 square inch, operating at 3000 PSI, they calculated the power at 35 HP per wheel at the wheel itself. The really interesting thing is the torque, 380 pounds feet at the first revolution! Similar to electric motors but with highest efficiency at the instant you start to move.

Calculated losses were in the range of 5%. With accumulator and line flow friction it should still be higher than 90% total. Hopefully a full regeneration cycle will exceed 82%.
As Vekke noticed, separating the engine (or motor if electric) operation from the actual vehicle propulsion function means the engine can operate completely independently from the speed of the vehicle, always within a few percentage of best BSFC.

The engine-motor only acts to replenish accumulator pressure, unless you are climbing one heck of a grade. Larger displacement engines run for a lower percentage of the total time the vehicle is moving, while smaller engines would operate for a higher percentage of time. The accumulator acts as a load leveler, allowing for complete elimination of any idling or light load operation that is inefficient. You could even have two small engines, with one available for significant grade climbing.

Since the engine is only connected to a fuel supply, as well as two hydraulic lines and a couple of electrical connections, changing the engine would take about 30 minutes.
In an electric configuration you would only need to have the battery power on or off to accomplish pressure regeneration so there would be no need for any power controller.

The vehicle could initially be propelled by a motorcycle engine. I'm thinking of the Honda CBR 250 since it already has fuel injection and a catalytic converter, as well as a feedback fuel system almost identical to current automobiles.

Once the drive is finished and with an accumulator acceleration would be regulated to the maximum traction of the single drive wheel. It would be better to have all wheels driven since that would allow regeneration to occur down to 0 wheel speed regardless of the accumulator pressure level. Even with no engine in the vehicle acceleration with accumulator pressure alone would be very rapid. Ideally 0-60 times would be in the range of 30 revolutions of the single rear wheel. From a dead stop that is around 200 feet!

regards
Mech

[UFO]

Originally Posted by botsapper

Been reading and speculating about these pneumatic/hydraulic hybrid motors for years. Here's the French inventor with a air-piston engine and his evolving vehicle prototypes. An Italian engineer's very light air-rotary piston engine used in many applications. And an enigmatic but very interesting hydraulic engine called Gigadron drive. Good luck on your next-gen project. It would be very interesting to see.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but this video on the air engines is really misleading. Not once do they mention where one fills their tank with compressed air -- it's insinuated one merely goes to any compressor but 150 Bar of pressure takes a significant energy input and specialized equipment. I'm sure the efficiency is close to that of an electric vehicle, but you won't get any of that from the video, just a whole lot of hype.

[Sven7]

I'm sorry, but what is the premise of this RIDE vehicle? Personal project? University project?

[user removed]

The University work proved the concept.
By building a practical vehicle capable of use for daily transportation, I will have absolute proof of the efficiency of the design.

Lets look at the 5 types of vehicle operation:

1. Idling:
Idling accounts for 13% of the total fuel consumption of the US vehicle population.
RIDE eliminates idling altogether.
2. Acceleration:
Acceleration is the only time during vehicle operation where the engine approaches maximum efficiency. RIDE utilizes deceleration forces to accomplish acceleration, When you slow down, for whatever reason the energy normally lost is recovered and reapplied for acceleration.
3. Constant speed driving:
While best mileage can be obtained with constant speed driving, it is not very efficient since you have to throttle the engine to reduce power and maintain speed. RIDE will cycle the engine on and off, at peak BSFC, to maintain a constant speed using the accumulator and infinitely variable drive to apply the precise amount of power to the wheels to maintain any constant speed.
4. Coasting:
This is where most cars are fairly efficient, but only if you turn the engine off. RIDE coasts automatically, using the neutral position in the drive, so it matches engine off coasting without any driver input whatsoever, other than choosing an accelerator position that makes the vehicle coast.
5. Deceleration:
While deceleration can be accomplished by coasting, which is very efficient, engine braking, or friction brake braking both are terrible wastes of energy. RIDE recaptures the energy otherwise wasted in engine braking or friction braking, by using decelerative forces to replenish accumulator pressure, thus reliving the engine of the job. This is actually the most significant reversal of losses in the whole process, going from a negative energy state to a positive one.

Too summarise:
Idling-eliminated
Acceleration-enhanced by using the prior decelerative act to reapply energy for acceleration.
Constant speed-enhanced efficiency by cycling the engine on and off at max BSFC while applying only the amount of energy necessary to maintain a constant speed. This doubles the engines efficiency at providing power to the wheels, since no throttle restriction is used to control power to the wheels.
Coasting-the only stage of operation where the conventional vehicle would match RIDE's efficiency, BUT only if you shut off the engine in the conventional vehicle. RIDE operates automatically with only an accelerator position input from the driver.
Deceleration-This is the most significant improvement. Any deceleration by engine or friction braking wastes energy dearly paid for previously. Instead of throwing it away, RIDE recovers that same energy for future application.

Now lets consider the other major factor, cost.

RIDE eliminates many systems in a normal car. The power train consists of an accumulator, hydraulic lines, and in wheel drives. In a normal vehicle the parts that are necessary to accomplish the same function constitute close to 30% of the total vehicle parts count.

Follow a schematic of your vehicle, from the flywheel to the wheels, including the friction brakes. Add to this the induction system controls necessary for controlling engine power output.

Take all of that out and throw it away!

Cheaper to build by a significant margin, while providing close to double the overall efficiency. The least expensive to manufacture vehicle on the planet, with the best efficiency, as well as the complete elimination of many systems that require repair and maintenance. You want electric, just use a motor and battery. You want liquid fueled, just use an IC engine. You could easily swap one for the other depending on your trip length, or even carry both. Without the peak energy demands of acceleration engine size would be determined by the maximum sustained loads encountered, but regardless of the engines size, the power producing cycle would use the same total amount of power, achieved at only best BSFC, regardless of the engines size. Big engines would run less time, small engines would run longer, but both would produce the same amount of power to match the average total demand of the vehicle. The only penalty with the larger engine would be its weight.

Build a better aerodynamic body and the RIDE power train automatically compensates for the reduced overall energy demand.

The purpose of the vehicle is to clearly demonstrate the overall effectiveness of the rotary hydraulic in wheel drive, by allowing a passenger to monitor fuel consumption by the ounce (128 per gallon) as you operate the vehicle.

[user removed]

Originally Posted by UFO

Sorry to hijack the thread, but this video on the air engines is really misleading. Not once do they mention where one fills their tank with compressed air -- it's insinuated one merely goes to any compressor but 150 Bar of pressure takes a significant energy input and specialized equipment. I'm sure the efficiency is close to that of an electric vehicle, but you won't get any of that from the video, just a whole lot of hype.

Another issue with highly compressed air is the potential for "dieseling" if there is any combustible vapor in the reservoir.

regards
Mech

[theycallmeebryan]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

I prefer the side by side seating. The front axle is 60 inches wide, and everything seems to fit well together with some room for side protection.
The curves match the template perfectly for best aerodynamics, and the design of the VW axle gives you a decent amount of collision protection as well as the natural tendency of the trailing arms to deflect and offset impact to the side.
Overall length of just over 12 feet is all I need to package everything.

regards
Mech

I understand all of that. However, how would side impact protection in a tandem design be any different in design than duplicating the side impact of a wider car, where the driver is sitting right next to the door? The only advantage in your design is that a driver would have about 3 feet of space from his right shoulder to the right door. From the left side of the car, the impact protection would (or could be) designed absolutely the same in a tandem design.

Ofcourse, the disadvantage would be double the frontal area. If you plan on driving around with a passenger 100% of the time, then fine. But is that ever the case with all of us? I'm in my car by myself more than 90% of the time I'm driving it. The right half of my car is completely unnecessary at that point.

You could make an open wheeled tandem design, much like the HyperRocket, and still have the same usable interior space as your design. Hell, you could also design the space behind the driver's seat to have a removable rear seat for extra cargo space.

If it were me building this project (which i wish i could do, not enough free time), I would build a reverse tadpole tandem just like the HyperRocket, except it would have a trunk space behind the rear passenger seat, and have a removable rear seat for added cargo space. That way, regardless if i have a passenger in the car or not, I would always have the most efficient design for FE without any wasted space.

Just throwing my thoughts out there. Good luck on your project!