Wrightspeed, a Tesla-cofounder's spinoff company

[Logic]

It seems Wrightspeed is successful:
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...k+wrightspeed+

Key Points: IMHO

The recuperator ( = heat exchanger) that puts heat back into the system, pre turbine, is the key to efficiency in these turbines..
For these to be efficient they need to be Rotary Heat Exchangers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEpYpBcXbnI

While the efficiency of the turbine is slightly worse to no better than a decent diesel genset, it weighs 10% of a Diesel.
ie: Looking at BSFC alone is fine for stationary engines.
But as soon as you have to accelerate weight (the vehicle) the efficiency of the whole system (the vehicle) increases...

[freebeard]

I'd heard of enthalpy wheels, but not these:

Thermal wheel
A thermal wheel, also known as a rotary heat exchanger, or rotary air-to-air enthalpy wheel, energy recovery wheel, or heat recovery wheel, is a type of energy recovery heat exchanger positioned within the supply and exhaust air streams of air-handling units or rooftop units or in the exhaust gases of an industrial process, in order to recover the heat energy. Other variants include enthalpy wheels and desiccant wheels. Wikipedia

One of my design goals is a toroidal HVAC unit that can live in the top of a hemisphere. This could fit right in with a horizontal wheel. (An hula hoop filled with eutectic salts?)

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Logic

While the efficiency of the turbine is slightly worse to no better than a decent diesel genset, it weighs 10% of a Diesel.
ie: Looking at BSFC alone is fine for stationary engines.
But as soon as you have to accelerate weight (the vehicle) the efficiency of the whole system (the vehicle) increases...

That's why it's proposed to be used as a serial-hybrid. Not to mention turbines often have too much delay on the acceleration.

[Logic]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLoAZENxCBA

Where Capstone fails is their Magnetic? or Air? Bearings.
(And suing WrightSpeed And co. for saying so!)

They DO NOT!!! do well in car type startup-stop and bumps, vibration and jarring.
They like to be started and stay started, standing still... (yes; the market they are now sticking to...)

WrightSpeed built their own ball bearing turbine.

But what they WILL NEVER get right is jumping through the hurdles and hoops of fire set up by the Oil Industry to kill this tech in the cradle IMHO,.
They named it 'Emissions Certification'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bzTacdlpR8&t=126s

My plan would be:
Sell a pure EV. With a stationary genset.
That just so happens to bolt into 'cavity' in the truck/car etc in 2 minutes flat!
And comes with a free 'F... Politics!' sticker!

(Naturally I'd also 'sell' a 'Other Option' Range Extender battery pack that fitted that cavity, and token solar panel.

Something to wave around in court and @ Bunny Huggers etc.)

[Piotrsko]

If I wanted to, I could put in a 3liter 4 banger back into the Ranger I converted to EV. There's room and still keep the Kostov motor. No reason to because if I have more battery I can produce more electric hp

Solar panels of any size doesn't hack the requirements of "solar" which is best used for recharge the battery unless you have square footage cubed for panels

[Logic]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

If I wanted to, I could put in a 3liter 4 banger back into the Ranger I converted to EV. There's room and still keep the Kostov motor. No reason to because if I have more battery I can produce more electric hp

If you have a genset it provides Watts over and above what is in the battery too.
ie: For hard acceleration and climbing, you can use Genset Watts + Battery Watts
just as you might use Battery Watts + extra Battery Watts

Difference is you can go to a whole lot more far away places where there are no charge stations.
In-fact, there's electricity wherever you go.
(Here, there is often no power @ home. Think Venezuela )

80x the energy per unit weight and size vs batteries.
That makes for a lighter vehicle too.

Plus:
Prioritizing the genset watts, when it's on, saves the battery from a discharge-charge cycle, or decreases the discharge-charge cycle Watts by whatever the genset produces.
ie: Battery life is increased.

You dont suffer from the cold battery = limited power issue. (as much)

Heating the battery does not decrease range.
And the ICE efficiency is increased whenever heat is required for the battery or interior.

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

Solar panels of any size doesn't hack the requirements of "solar" which is best used for recharge the battery unless you have square footage cubed for panels

Exactly my point, but politicians and most people dont realize that.
So with a solar panel of any size, you can advertise: "Solar Powered" and everyone's smiling.
How-TH was that not clear to you!??

[Piotrsko]

Like arguing with a baboon, but eventually the baboon enjoys the event

[Piwoslaw]

Originally Posted by Logic

If you have a genset it provides Watts over and above what is in the battery too.
ie: For hard acceleration and climbing, you can use Genset Watts + Battery Watts
just as you might use Battery Watts + extra Battery Watts

Difference is you can go to a whole lot more far away places where there are no charge stations.
In-fact, there's electricity wherever you go.
(Here, there is often no power @ home. Think Venezuela )

80x the energy per unit weight and size vs batteries.
That makes for a lighter vehicle too.

Plus:
Prioritizing the genset watts, when it's on, saves the battery from a discharge-charge cycle, or decreases the discharge-charge cycle Watts by whatever the genset produces.
ie: Battery life is increased.

I'd go 1 step further and completely prioritize the genset, to the point where the battery can be disconnected, further extending its lifetime.
And if I remove the batteries then I would dramatically reduce the vehicle's weight, reducing the genset's fuel consumption.
But with less weight to haul around, the genset's ICE could also be downsized, further increasing fuel efficiency. Not to mention manufacturing/purchase and lifetime maintenance costs.

[Logic]

Originally Posted by Piwoslaw

I'd go 1 step further and completely prioritize the genset, to the point where the battery can be disconnected, further extending its lifetime.
And if I remove the batteries then I would dramatically reduce the vehicle's weight, reducing the genset's fuel consumption.
But with less weight to haul around, the genset's ICE could also be downsized, further increasing fuel efficiency. Not to mention manufacturing/purchase and lifetime maintenance costs.

There's a tipping point:
A point where a couple of batteries that add extra oomph for acceleration
and are recharged by Regen
beats out a bigger engine.

A point where an EV + a genset supplying ??? more watts than the Average is lighter than plain old ICE.

Also:
Tuning intake and exhaust and cam etc is cheap and simple for consant rpm.
Research in that direction pointed to 30% more efficient IIRC, but I wont (Again) be linking
research no-one reads.

[Logic]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

Like arguing with a baboon, but eventually the baboon enjoys the event

LOL!

A baboon who's ideas are being incorporated into ICE engines copied by F1.
(see pgfpro's thread)
Any ideas from you going anywhere?


Facts to Contest:

1. Fuel is ~80X more energy dense and lighter/smaller than battery.
2. Most all batteries (world average) are ultimately charged using hydrocarbons.

Congrats on building a EV though.
Any build log here?