The problem with series hybrids

[dcb]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

... And even if you do leave it out, the serial hybrid still beats an ICE powered car.

That is simply not substantiated, not better when on the hiway, or with a good driver (especially if good with a wrench), or for a vehicle like a 1l or a 470mpg motorcycle. It is true in the general, sloppy driver sense, but I am aiming for the ideal sense here, what is the most efficient (yet practical) use of petrol, and that is for longer range travel.

Electrics can do short range, we know this, and knock %90+ of vehicle petrol use right out if everyone had one and the grid could handle it, and they reduced their existing gassers to %10 duty.

why do we need to make MORE gassers?

[NeilBlanchard]

Hi Dave,

On the highway, you can still get regenerative braking. The electric motor is still 90+% efficient at pushing the car, while the ICE powered car is still sitting at 20-38% thermal efficiency.

How can the Mini hybrid get 80mpg and 750 mile range in charging mode vs ~40+ in the standard car?

[dcb]

look, electric has nothing to do with what I'm asking, it only clouds the issue into an incomprehendable mess (i.e. what about well to wheels?!? electric motors are NOT always running at 90% either, they are rpm and load sensitive too. Of course batteries and controllers are not always operating at peak either).

The main question IMHO is the efficiency of the ICE engine and transmission, and since I'm quite happy with a chain and sprocket which has been clocked at 98% efficient for my target speed, how can an ICE running a generator running a controller running a motor (running a gear reduction) possibly compete?

I personally don't use the brakes on the hiway enough to make a difference. Brakes are a waste of energy, even with regen.

I don't buy the 80mpg figure, they didn't offer any explanations of their "translation", I CAN'T make it add up because it makes zero sense to me, the way overunity does.

[RobertSmalls]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

We have several known examples of serial hybrids: diesel/electric trains are serial hybrids -- I wonder how it is they can move a ton well over 400 miles on just one gallon of diesel?

It bothers me every time I hear that line in the railroad ads. No, it can't. I bet a train uses many gallons of fuel just to get up to speed. If you have to move one ton of freight, use a truck. The train will be lucky if it makes it a mile on one gallon.

The railroad ads also neglect to mention the 120mi/(ton-gallon) figure for a fully loaded tractor trailer, and that if you use rail, the load will travel more miles overall, and you'll need a truck to finish the job.

Railroads save fuel, and we should use them more. But their ads paint an incomplete picture.

And a train is actually pretty aerodynamic. It's like a paceline of 100 tractor trailers drafting each other very close. Actually, it's more like a train, with a negligible frontal area, an enormous wetted area, and unfortunate gaps between each rail car.


Anyway, I can tell you my hybrid gets its best fuel economy when the electric system is inactive. Sure, while accelerating, I could use the electric motor to shift the engine to a more efficient operating regime, but I'd have to pay the battery back at an efficiency less than 100%. When, as dcb points out in the first post, 90% of peak BSFC is easily achievable, it really doesn't pay to use the electric.

Given a series hybrid with a certain size engine and electric motor in a certain chassis, you could improve its highway efficiency by making it a parallel hybrid, without exception. Instead of the Volt running its ICE to run a generator to run a motor to drive the wheels, just use the ICE to drive the wheels once battery charge runs out.

A parallel hybrid with a large electric motor could be designed to cruise on the highway near peak BSFC, using the ICE for cruising and the electric for accelerating.

I expect my next car to be a plug-in parallel hybrid with a tiny gas engine and enough electric range to handle my commute.

[user removed]

Valentin Technologies, Inc. - The 170MPG Car

Artemis Intelligent Power demostrates hydraulic hybrid BMW 530i w/Video — Autoblog Green

When you compare a UPS delivery vehicle to a HH version of the same vehicle and see a 30-40% improvement in efficiency, you should try very hard to understand that the standard version is already optimized for fuel efficiency.

What would a comparable TDI VW (also optimized for fuel efficiency) do if it was getting 30-40% better mileage after being converted to a HH system.

No gas electric hybrid could touch it.

Will you spend 30 k for an BEV with a 100 mile range? Every source I have read admits that BEVs will be a very small minority of the vehicles on the road for decades to come.

Every source (the optimistic ones) tells us the battery technology breakthrough is just around the corner.

The technology for 100 MPG is already here fellow ecomodders. Read the links provided.

I can only imagine the cars we would be driving today if 1% of the resources that have been spent on BEV technology over the last 3 decades had been devoted to perfecting the HH configuration.

Also remember HH is not an exclusive technology by any means. Take the Nissan Leaf, add a rear axle HH launch assist to double the regenerative efficiency and conserve the battery. Now your range is 150 miles, under the typical driving situation a short range BEV will encounter every day.

It is truly a shame that we allow govt funding to decide the development pathway for vehicles when they do not understand the most basic principles of energy supply and transportation technology.

The same applies to emissions. In both cases we have bureaucrats deciding what has to be accomplished, when they are universally ignorant of the technological possibilities. While I am not any Europhobe, at least they have the principles right, focus on CO2 and promote efficiency in vehicles, with high fuel cost and taxes as deterrents to gross over consumption.

The US must look at all options for efficiency and energy independence. Until we do we are grossly over polluting and bleeding our national net worth to our enemies.

Hopefully by the end of this year I will have a vehicle that demonstrates my design in a real world application.

Now, if you have read this post check out this link. It is the first demonstration of my design, running on shop compressed air. You can see from the size of my hand how large it is. A wheel spinning at this speed would be doing well in excess of 100 MPH. Shop air has little energy compared to several thousand pounds of hydraulic fluid pressure.

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

We search for novelty in our quest for high efficiency.

The Patent Office has determined that this constitutes novelty. I would hope it deserves rational consideration.

regards
Mech

[user removed]

THIS CAR TRAVELS 75 MILES ON A SINGLE GALLON OF GASOLINE!

How much has been spent on battery developments since this was built?

How many billions of barrels of oil wasted?

How much CO2 in the atmosphere?

regards
Mech

[NeilBlanchard]

Electric motors range between 80% and 93% under load.

Another example of a serial hybrid:

The FVT alé is the ICE version (a extremely efficient fuel vapor technology ICE, too) and it gets up to 92mpg.

The FVT eVaro is a serial hybrid that gets between 125MPGe and 325MPGe.

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

How can the Mini hybrid get 80mpg and 750 mile range in charging mode vs ~40+ in the standard car?

Source?

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

When you compare a UPS delivery vehicle to a HH version of the same vehicle and see a 30-40% improvement in efficiency, you should try very hard to understand that the standard version is already optimized for fuel efficiency.

That's the thing, the electric hybrid also sees a similar improvement compared to stock. What it comes down to then is cost and availability. Whichever one is cheaper in larger orders will probably be what's used for the most part.

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

What would a comparable TDI VW (also optimized for fuel efficiency) do if it was getting 30-40% better mileage after being converted to a HH system.

No gas electric hybrid could touch it.

Maybe not, but we're looking at marginal returns here. A gas hybrid can easily double the mileage of a similarly sized car, ala a stock Prius versus a Camry. If we turn the Prius into a HH, we're not going to double the mileage again, but odds are we're going to more than double the cost. It's just diminishing returns. Now, if gas prices go up more, while costs go down, then alternatives may become financially viable, just like hybrids became viable this decade, but we aren't at the point yet.

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

Will you spend 30 k for an BEV with a 100 mile range? Every source I have read admits that BEVs will be a very small minority of the vehicles on the road for decades to come.

Every source (the optimistic ones) tells us the battery technology breakthrough is just around the corner.

The technology for 100 MPG is already here fellow ecomodders. Read the links provided.

HHs seem to suffer from the same issues EVs do. The cost doesn't justify the investment. Something like a Prius only carries a premium of a few grand over similarly sized vehicles, and it can reduce operating costs for the owner by well over a thousand bucks per year at the national average in terms of miles driven. Both EVs and HHs have a much higher premium and save the owner way less. Lets say an EV/HH has a ~$9000 premium over a hybrid. At best it's going to cut fuel costs by a third compared to a hybrid, and the reduction in brake wear is already present w/ a hybrid, so people are looking at a ~30 year payback compared to a hybrid, while a hybrid only has a ~3 year payback compared to a similarly sized conventional car.

[RobertSmalls]

Originally Posted by roflwaffle

A gas hybrid can easily double the mileage of a similarly sized car, ala a stock Prius versus a Camry.

Not fair. Turning a Camry into a Prius involves an aerodynamic rebody, just like the 75mpg (at steady state cruise) VW Bug hydraulic hybrid. The only apples-to-apples comparos on the market are Camry vs Camry Hybrid, and Civic vs Civic Hybrid. These hybrids have a 31% and 45% improvement in EPA Combined over their conventional counterparts.

What kind of fuel economy would that aero-Bug have delivered if they had used the same Tecumseh engine powering the rear wheels through just a tranny, instead of through two hydraulic motors and a hydraulic accumulator as they did?