Graphene

LockH said:
"... But the range is limited "

The weight of the vehicle has nothing to do with things, of course. Cough, cough... hehe
Aerodynamics is the biggest factor in play. Weight does effect it tire flex etc. But with regen you use the weight to recapture some of the waste. Yes adding a few hundred pounds to the leaf will reduce the range and small amount but as I said with the word "BASICLY" it will double with double the battery. Remember there will be less sag so less battery losses as well.
 
"biggest factor"... perhaps the biggest of various factors.

And re "... weight to recapture some of the waste." Operative word waste maybe.

Less bettery (sp?) losses? Always golden.
 
LockH said:
"biggest factor"... perhaps the biggest of various factors.

And re "... weight to recapture some of the waste." Operative word waste maybe.

Less bettery (sp?) losses? Always golden.
So you are telling me they can't make a leaf go any further on a charge no matter how many batteries they install, there is just no way to make it go any further on the current battery tech we have now? And some new magical tech will make it go some magical number further...? :roll:
 
Vehicle Coefficient of Drag List:
http://ecomodder.com/wiki/index.php/Vehicle_Coefficient_of_Drag_List


If I understand inertia correctly, for more mass moved from stop or lower speeds to higher speeds or up hills, weight (eg batteries) BAD. So, fast charge or fast swap for "fresh", recharged batts... "better".

Just taking aerodynamics, the Aptera shape pretty much tops that list above (closely followed by the GM EV1. Quick, better crush that!).

(Dang. Now I'm hankering for a Nanaimo Bar.)
 
Yes. More weight will take more energy to get moving but will aslo have more energy to recapture when you slow down and use regen to recapture some of the energy spent to move in the first place. You will loose more energy in the end yes. But some will be recaptured.
FWI luke can correct me if I don't have it right but BATTERY SAG will cause battery heat which is a loss. And with 2x the capacity you will get about 1/2 the sag so 1/2 the battery losses.

The average YES I said AVERAGE vehicle find wind to be the biggest losses at or above 45 mph. This will change depending on areo but wind will be the biggest losses for all vehicles at some speed and because wind resistance goes up at the square of the speed it will mean that even if you lower the co-efficient of drag (with the same frontal surface area) by 2x of the AVERAGE car you will still find that wind will be your biggest losses at ~50% above the estimated 45mph. Even the tesla Model S limits its top speed to save the battery and it has the lowest co-efficent of drag of any production car in history.

Again lockH
Are you trying to say that will a bigger pack of the same chemistry the leaf would not travel further????????????
 
"battery heat which is a loss."... and brake pads heating up?


Anyway, thanks for good points.

"Are you trying to say that will a bigger pack of the same chemistry the leaf would not travel further????????????"

Hehe... Only that added weight = higher Wh/km. Yes?
 
It might mean higher wh/km but what I'm saying if it does it won't be much.
 
LockH said:
"battery heat which is a loss."... and brake pads heating up?s?
Brakes don't heat up with regen. I ride my day to day commuting with only regen and absolutely no mechanical brakes now that I have variable regen. I only use mechanical brakes for emergency stops and racing as I only have regen on the rear wheel.

I guess another good example is the zero S and Sr if you only get the s with 3 packs which weighs a lot less as each pack weighs 42 lbs. You will have a lot less range then the version with 5 packs.
 
Hehe... "won't be much". For a time I lived in Europe (England), where in the early 1960s, folks were still VERY aware of "waste", following WW2. (A lotta countries were involved, obviously, but those crazy Brits (civilians) were almost "in the thick of things" through the wars (currently reading about Zeppelins causing lots of problems in WW1 (the crews and "luggage" I mean. Tech not so bad, if folks don't shoot at it, etc).

Ed: Some might conclude I may be interested in Herstory/History (see ES thread "Horses of Iron", etc.) And per WWW "Graphene is simply one atomic layer of graphite - a layer of sp2 bonded carbon atoms arranged in a hexagonal or honeycomb lattice." Have used "graphite" as tubes/spars/battens re sailing boats, hence my interest in "graphene", perhaps.
 
Batteries are only one possible use for graphene. From what I can tell, it is a very good conductor, much better than copper but not quite superconducting. This seems like perfect stuff to make motor windings from, if they can make it work like a wire. There are plenty of other applications where a super efficient conductor would be useful.

Now, where did I put that old blender?
 
Plus One re above.
 
Gab said:
interesting stuff this graphene
Yeah gust like everyone else I am wondering how this newly discovered property Graphene is going to help the progress of boner pill technology or make my iPad faster but apparently there are some other exciting uses for it in the future. Check out the video and learn.

[youtube]Mcg9_ML2mXY[/youtube]
 
$10 Bet Brings Researchers Closer to Industrial Scale Graphene Production
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/09/08/10-bet-leads-to-new-synthetic-graphene/
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/09/07/graphene-infographic/
http://science.psu.edu/news-and-events/2014-news/Mallouk9-2014
 
Lock-

Did the calcs for steady state cruise at 65mph for a stock leaf or leaf with double battery mass added.
http://ecomodder.com/forum/tool-aero-rolling-resistance.php

It appears it would be entirely possible to improve system efficiency at cruise (where most of a vehicles battery is spent) by doubling battery mass, and halving pack sag as a result.

So yes, it's possible to decrease your system wh/mile Wh/mile adding battery mass in real world practical situations.

The reason most EVs come with piddly energy storage batteries is because of cost and cost alone.
 
Oh. V. good point Master LFP! So maybe not the weight alone, but how much energy stored per unit of mass. (Electrons themselves pretty "light-weight" in relative terms.) So maybe not the weight, but what you do with it. (Oh oh. Feel an old/rude joke coming on.)
 
OK, here's another mind-bender emerging on cusp of science research: Energy Storage Slam-Dunk: Graphene + Carbon Nanotubes + Li-ion EV Batteries
Partnering in the new research is Rice University, which has been doing a deep dive into next-generation nano-carbon energy storage technology.

The team found that they could construct a supercapacitor “sandwich” in the form of a super-strong, super-thin film. Here’s the money quote: The film could be embedded in a car’s body panels, roof, doors, bonnet and floor – storing enough energy to turbocharge an electric car’s battery in just a few minutes.

The findings have been published online in the upcoming January 2015 issue of the Journal of Power Sources....

....This electrode is transferred onto a plastic-paper-supported double-wall carbon nanotube film used as current collector. These all-carbon thin films are combined with plastic paper and gelled electrolyte to produce solid-state bendable thin film supercapacitors.
 
Joseph C. said:
...
Let's say the woman is only fertile for three days per cycle. 1000 times still leaves her with a 89 per cent chance of pregnancy using a condom correctly.
I'm off topic, but I've wondered about that. Convention qualifies relationships on a time-length basis: 2 years together; separated at 4, and so on. But another method of assessing the "length" of a relationship would be the number of times the couple engaged in intercourse or something (mating, shall we say).
The number would vary for different couples, but there would be an average number.
They say marriages typically last 4 years. I wonder what that would be in terms of number of matings?
 
Laser-induced graphene ‘super’ for electronics.
http://news.rice.edu/2015/01/14/laser-induced-graphene-super-for-electronics-2/
A schematic shows the process developed by Rice University scientists to make vertical microsupercapacitors with laser-induced graphene.


http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/web/2015/01/Deep-Frying-Graphene-Spheres-Energy.html
Materials scientists have constructed round, pom-pom-like graphene microparticles by spraying graphene oxide droplets into a hot solvent—a process akin to deep-frying .

http://news.rice.edu/2014/12/10/defects-are-perfect-in-laser-induced-graphene/

[youtube]N47UpNONzOk[/youtube]
 
Have to say I'm still enamoured with the possibilities of graphene, including condoms & also, as above, in vehicle bodies as super-capacitors. Now I'm wondering what might emerge in the combo? Would it be possible to build an ultra-thin super-capacitor condom? One that creates an enhanced electrical conduit for the partners? An initial jolt that enhances the sexual experience? We live an age of dreams & wonders. Takes the edge off of the NTHE débâcle unfolding. I mean what better to do with the time remaining but perfect the condom?
 
Graphene is very interesting, but what if you crash while your car"s whole body is one big supercapacitor? That"s gonna throw some spectacular sparks.
 
Back
Top