Gas/Electric Car based on Niagara Falls?

[scottie300z]

I watched a video the other day and they discussed Niagrara Falls and how they use the water to turn turbines to turn a shaft which are under magnets that spin inside a cylinder that has copper wires that then create electricity.

My question is, Could a gas engine that powers the wheels normally, be used in conjunction with magnets within the wheel wells that are in the same type of copper wire filled cylinders to create electricity and then recharge batteries that are in the car? When the batteries are full the car could then go fully electric but when they run out the car could switch back on the gas engine. This would multiply greatly the distance an electric car could travel since the power to recharge the batteries is there as long as you have filled up your gas tank.

[acfsambo]

If you did that, you would need more power from the engine to power the car, due to the Law of Conservation of Energy. It would work, and has been used, if it only turned on when braking, using your kinetic energy to charge up the battery and even help you slow down. This is called regenerative braking.

[scottie300z]

Ah yes, regenerative braking.

Well to get the same performance you would need more power but say you took an sti or something that could be slowed down and still seem like a normal daily driver. After all, the main purpose of the gas engine would be to just recharge. Has it been documented how much of a drain on performance a system would be? And naturally how fast the battery charges would determine how fast the shafts spin so you would end up charging your batteries faster the faster you go even though your top speed would take a large hit.

Also, couldn't you take a fwd car (or rwd) and with a setup much like an awd car send power to the back (or front) but only to shafts leading up to the magnets instead of powering the wheels. And then w/ the computer you could set how much power goes back. So say you have a 300hp car and you send 20% back to charge the batteries, you should still be getting plenty of hp to overcome the added weight and drive like a normal car but still taking advantage of the battery power when you want to save money on gas.

[Alastor]

Originally Posted by scottie300z

Also, couldn't you take a fwd car (or rwd) and with a setup much like an awd car send power to the back (or front) but only to shafts leading up to the magnets instead of powering the wheels. And then w/ the computer you could set how much power goes back. So say you have a 300hp car and you send 20% back to charge the batteries, you should still be getting plenty of hp to overcome the added weight and drive like a normal car but still taking advantage of the battery power when you want to save money on gas.

The problem is that electrical system won't be 100% efficient. So if you are cursing along and only using 60 of the 300 hp you could use another 40 hp to charge the batteries. Except when you go to drive the car using the batteries alone there may only be 35 hp available, because some energy was lost in the conversion.

The net effect is using 40 hp worth of gas to get 35 hp worth of electricity, that is not a good deal.

BTW I made the numbers up.

[NSXType-R]

Yeah, and the complexity of the magnets/motors in the wheels really weigh it down. Imagine all that weight moving up and down through bumps and stuff.

Plus, you forget that it isn't a perfect system and some friction will definitely be there.

Definitely a good idea to think about in the future with better technologies though.

[drakkie]

Nice to see it being brought up, because I have been involved in engineering projects for my school with these subjects a lot. I have designed a regenerative braking system in the past. If you wnat to use it right now, you can win back about 30% of the energy stored in the movement. In the future it will be more.

Efficiency of these electronic components talked about is around 95%, that includes drivetrain losses and more.

My personal favorite variant is a small size diesel engine, that produces a constant amount of power. Like a small generator, to batteries. From there is it transferred to four in-wheel motors which power the vehicle.

Honestly though, screw all this eco-crap. It's just something we work a lot with on school, but my backing it doesn't have. Not unless somebody can prove the greenhouse-effect and that global warming is caused by humans. Waste of time and resources.

[Wouter Melissen]

Originally Posted by drakkie

Honestly though, screw all this eco-crap. It's just something we work a lot with on school, but my backing it doesn't have. Not unless somebody can prove the greenhouse-effect and that global warming is caused by humans. Waste of time and resources.

I guess you also don't believe that there is only a limited supply of oil on the planet.

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by drakkie

Honestly though, screw all this eco-crap. It's just something we work a lot with on school, but my backing it doesn't have. Not unless somebody can prove the greenhouse-effect and that global warming is caused by humans. Waste of time and resources.

Proving anything like that with absolute certainty is impossible.

The fact of the matter is that the prevailing scientific consensus is that global warming is it least in some part (likely a large part) due to humanity.

The greenhouse effect is proven - it is a scientific phenomenon in certain high CO2 atmosphere - Venus is a great example of the greenhouse effect in action.

Furthermore, even if the scientific community wasn't sure what effect these gases were having on the Earth's climate, should we really take that risk?

History is full of many instances where humanity has utilized new technology or processes without fully knowing the damage done until it was too late.

When the odds are as high as causing a complete global ecological and economical catastrophe, is it really wise to not be cutting back?

[Birdman]

As others have stated, if you add a system like this your car will need to overcome the extra friction caused by these devices. The next part to consider is the storage device. Batteries, even some of the best rechargeable ones, have a finite cycle life. There are only so many times you can charge/discharge these before they degrade to a level where they can no longer hold a sufficient charge. As far as I've heard, current hybrids need their batteries changed after about two years.
The solution to this is to build capacitors that can charge quickly and hold a sufficient charge.

So in short: systems will cause extra friction, can't store all the power, batteries have finite life.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by drakkie

Nice to see it being brought up, because I have been involved in engineering projects for my school with these subjects a lot. I have designed a regenerative braking system in the past. If you wnat to use it right now, you can win back about 30% of the energy stored in the movement. In the future it will be more.

Efficiency of these electronic components talked about is around 95%, that includes drivetrain losses and more.

My personal favorite variant is a small size diesel engine, that produces a constant amount of power. Like a small generator, to batteries. From there is it transferred to four in-wheel motors which power the vehicle.

Honestly though, screw all this eco-crap. It's just something we work a lot with on school, but my backing it doesn't have. Not unless somebody can prove the greenhouse-effect and that global warming is caused by humans. Waste of time and resources.

Drakkie - You're an idiot, and a disgrace to the profession of engineering. I'm still in shock at the sheer stupidity of what I have just read. If you seriously believe that releasing burnt hydrocarbons as well as nitrogen compounds and other nasty molecules is not something we should worry about, I'd like you to take a nice length of tubing and pipe said gases from your car into your home. 90% of the threads you make here show a major lack of understanding of crucial facts of life and serious irresponsibility, and the other 10% are almost pathetic attemptsto show off your "engineering knowledge."



As far as electrical storage systems - what you're talking about is the basis of hybrid technology, which is to maximize the efficiency of a petrol or diesel engine in various ways. There are two problems with this: First, with current tech, a high percentage of the energy is lost, and secondly, while hybrids will help, they will not solve our growing fuel problem, only buy us time.
As long as we're relying on fossil fuels we are poisoning our environment and depleting a finite resource. The only clean answer at the moment is a full electric or full hydrogen car (where the H is made from electricity) AND MOST IMPORTANTLY we can't rely on fossil fuels for electricity forever- we need to switch to renewable energy sun, wind, water, and geothermal.

[drakkie]

Originally Posted by Bob

Drakkie - You're an idiot, and a disgrace to the profession of engineering. I'm still in shock at the sheer stupidity of what I have just read. If you seriously believe that releasing burnt hydrocarbons as well as nitrogen compounds and other nasty molecules is not something we should worry about, I'd like you to take a nice length of tubing and pipe said gases from your car into your home. 90% of the threads you make here show a major lack of understanding of crucial facts of life and serious irresponsibility, and the other 10% are almost pathetic attemptsto show off your "engineering knowledge."

I study 100 metres from the dirtiest spot in Europe so I am used to something,but I still am not convinced of all the ecological stuff last years. I am never unwilling to learn or to be corrected and like everyone I get stuff wrong as well. The assumptions made by most that it is the truth are wrong. It might be the truth.. Always stay critical and keep asking is what I was learned when small and I hope to always stick to that !

As far as electrical storage systems - what you're talking about is the basis of hybrid technology, which is to maximize the efficiency of a petrol or diesel engine in various ways. There are two problems with this: First, with current tech, a high percentage of the energy is lost, and secondly, while hybrids will help, they will not solve our growing fuel problem, only buy us time.
As long as we're relying on fossil fuels we are poisoning our environment and depleting a finite resource. The only clean answer at the moment is a full electric or full hydrogen car (where the H is made from electricity) AND MOST IMPORTANTLY we can't rely on fossil fuels for electricity forever- we need to switch to renewable energy sun, wind, water, and geothermal.

They will indeed not solve our fuel problem, nor are they very efficient. But the electrical systems on itself(battery, generator, motor etc. ) are compared to ice's.

The use of fossil fuels in vehicles only contributes to a very minor part of the total emissions. The poisoning wuld not be too bad. We have been poisoning the environment for ages now and vehicles have become much more clean in the past years. I don't think that is really a problem, it is messed up now anyway.

The use of hydrogen in vehicles is quite difficult for various reasons. Though there is not a really good alternative to it, you can clearly see that some manufacturers are moving their strategies away from it ! For example GM, that is almost ready for production of the Closed-Loop diesel and the HCCI-engine a little further away. I (and many fellow students here) don't see the move from fossil fuels to hydrogen or other fuels in the next ten years.

Main problem is the production capacity. It is rather energy consuming to produce it and though it all sounds nice, using "green" sources for this energy do you realistically see this happening in the near future ???

The cost of investment in alternatives to hydrogen are much less and a lot more promising in the short run. Just to name one, the use of CNG in commercial vehicles.

[sweethe]

Originally Posted by Alastor

The problem is that electrical system won't be 100% efficient. So if you are cursing along and only using 60 of the 300 hp you could use another 40 hp to charge the batteries. Except when you go to drive the car using the batteries alone there may only be 35 hp available, because some energy was lost in the conversion.

The net effect is using 40 hp worth of gas to get 35 hp worth of electricity, that is not a good deal.

BTW I made the numbers up.

I wouldn't mind having one of those, actually.
I'm excitedly waiting all the changes in technology and availability of vehicles in the near future!!!

[MRR]

Originally Posted by drakkie

The use of fossil fuels in vehicles only contributes to a very minor part of the total emissions. The poisoning wuld not be too bad. We have been poisoning the environment for ages now and vehicles have become much more clean in the past years. I don't think that is really a problem, it is messed up now anyway.

The problem with fossil fuels and automobiles is less the pollution bit (modern engines burn very clean and efficiently) but the supply of petroleum. At current consumption rates all known petroleum reserves will be depleted sometime between 40-60 years from now and that is assuming current consumption rate (well pressure falls as time passes).

I like your idea you mentioned earlier of a diesel motor generating electricity with motors on all 4 wheels compared to the volt's gasoline generator for example. Diesel makes much more sense for this application.

[Alastor]

Originally Posted by MRR

..modern engines burn very clean and efficiently...

Compared to what? I thought it was widely accepted that there are better ways to produce energy than a small ICE.

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by Alastor

Compared to what? I thought it was widely accepted that there are better ways to produce energy than a small ICE.

Un-modern engines? ECEs? lol