electric vs gas theory

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by billvon » Jun 06 2017 6:29pm

Hillhater wrote:Electric traction motors have been in vehicles continuously over the past 100 yrs. (think ....trams , trains, light trucks, mining equipment, fork trucks, etc etc)
Yep. But when applied to EV's, things change. Locomotives, for example, benefit from the heaviest motor designs, since they need weight. EV's benefit from the lightest motor designs. These designs are making their appearance now, and will continue to evolve as motor drives, batteries and EV's evolve.
I would think there is more potential for improving a <40% efficient ice engine , than there is in in improving a 95+% efficient electric motor. !
Well, there was a tremendous potential for improving the first 10% efficient ICE engines. And we have seen many of those efficiency improvements. Variable ignition timing? Check. Stratified charge? Check. Closed loop mixture control? Check. Atkinson cycle engines? Check. Turbocharging? Check. Multivalve engines? Check. Cylinder shutdown? Check.

We've also seen many attempted improvements that looked promising - but ultimately did not deliver on their promises. Water injection? Helps with power in some engines, but does not improve efficiency enough to add the weight/complexity of the injectors. Rotary engines? Cool, but not ultimately more efficient than piston engines.

There is undoubtedly more improvements to be made in the ICE engine - but after 100 years of development, most possibilities have been tried, and either accepted or rejected. So pretty much all the "low hanging fruit" has been harvested. There are more things to try (hybrid turbocharger, for example, that adds a motor/generator to a turbine shaft) but the age of significant, straightforward improvements is pretty much over.
--bill von

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 06 2017 7:19pm

Bang on correct billvon I'd say.
The engine itself has advanced alot with atomized fuel being fired in measured amounts with a exhaust probes (lambda sensors) giving signals to ecus to cut back fuel as unburnt vapour reaches the exhaust chamber along with many other sensors being monitored thousands of times a second.
What we need to see know is things like alternators and starter motors combined together to create more efficent ancillarys that support the heart beat of the ice engine that can actual assist in energy input not always take energy from the system along with ways of capturing the waste heat energy through the turbo as well as the kinetic mass of the car that will help assist technology advancment in ice development to get past 100mpg in a car that needs a tank of no more than 30 litres like my first car to have a range upto 3 times of what I would achieve 700 miles or so.
Ice engines may get upto 40% in ideal conditions but when first started they could ideally do with assistants to keep them from wasting to much energy an electric motor could keep it at low load levels until the temps climb on the ice engine and it reaches its 40% efficency, so they slowly swap positions with until regen occurs or waste energy is available in some way.

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10537
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Dauntless » Jun 06 2017 7:35pm

billvon wrote: ?? That's a guy who used old laptop batteries to build a 130kw battery and stick it in a junker. It beats the Tesla in range, not acceleration. (His trash car actually blew a fuse and got stranded during the test.)
The news report was that he rescued the stranded Tesla. Dang, I'm somewhere away from home and FINALLY got to see that.

Dang, this thread is about the closest we've come to people discussing things rather than just screaming 'You IDIOT!' in some time.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11342
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Hillhater » Jun 06 2017 9:44pm

Reviewing and dwelling on how ICEs progressed from 10% to 30% efficiency doesnt help predict how they might gain the next 20-30%. Who knows, we may have gone up the wrong path with turbos etc, maybe some new form of rotary ( there have been many to date) may unleash unknown benefits ?...maybe new sustainable , non carbon based fuels ?, ..
...you cannot predict what may be found tomorrow.
We already have 150kW EV motors weighing < 20kg, so again, not much "low hanging fruit" in that direction either.!
Priority 1 need for a major step forward in EVs is , higher energy density, low cost, safe, batteries. :wink:
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by billvon » Jun 06 2017 10:15pm

Ianhill wrote:What we need to see know is things like alternators and starter motors combined together to create more efficent ancillarys that support the heart beat of the ice engine that can actual assist in energy input not always take energy from the system along with ways of capturing the waste heat energy through the turbo as well as the kinetic mass of the car . . . .
Good point. One of the most interesting developments in vehicle propulsion in the past 20 years or so has been the fusion of electric motors and ICE engines (i.e. hybrids.) Atkinson engines have been around for ~130 years - but it took the integration of an electric motor to make it into a practical power source for a car. So while ICE engines have seen a lot of development, and electric motors seem "too simple" to improve - the integration of the two is just beginning to be explored.
--bill von

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10537
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Dauntless » Jun 07 2017 1:34am

All this talk of this new battery that'll be the magic bullet to make electrics perfect is just a smoke screen. The range is extended by doing a better job of packing more in the car, not by this super chemistry people keep hoping for. The car charges faster by going ahead and abusing the batteries some, with at least a bit of risk. The key is to use vehicles as they can be used successfully today, not to pretend they're all things to all people. As the batteries do work their way through the process of improving we can take advantage of that safely with no burning vehicles, homes, etc. Without the politicians passing a law that such and such battery will exist by a certain year, resulting in much pretending that batteries can be used in an outrageous manner at the time and be perfectly safe. (YIKES!) I don't even want imagine the average neighborhood full of people abusing batteries. It might be safer to have a nuclear power plant nearby.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5513
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Punx0r » Jun 07 2017 2:58am

Hillhater wrote:Reviewing and dwelling on how ICEs progressed from 10% to 30% efficiency doesnt help predict how they might gain the next 20-30%. Who knows, we may have gone up the wrong path with turbos etc, maybe some new form of rotary ( there have been many to date) may unleash unknown benefits ?...maybe new sustainable , non carbon based fuels ?, ..
...you cannot predict what may be found tomorrow.
Considering the scale of effort put in over a very long period of time and the diminishing returns seen on improving engine efficiency, why do you expect a sudden jump to double ICE efficiency from what we have today? That would seem to be the least likely possibility given all available evidence. And that's before you realise thermodynamics place an upper limit on the efficiency an ICE can achieve even in theory, that doesn't come close to even a shitty electric motor.

Hillhater wrote: We already have 150kW EV motors weighing < 20kg, so again, not much "low hanging fruit" in that direction either.!
Citation needed... Production, road-going, passenger carrying BEV, please...

Industrial motors are generally quite poor: large, heavy, modest efficiency. They are primarily optimised for low manufacturing cost over everything else.

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 07 2017 6:22pm

I'd say a ice engine with a CVT gearbox and electric motor on the output shaft of the gearbox, that way the electric motor/s get the final gear only and can add power, start the engine, or charge the auxiliary battery/ traction battery while nannying the ice engine upto temp.
I can see room to get well over 100mpg with a system like mentioned installed on a small 3 cylinder turbo that has regen on the turbo and freevalve tech for a better warming cycle adjusting the valves to preserve heat in the block at start up and in turn limiting the nasty emissions that comes with a cold engine but the hard part is keeping a competitive price point and keep people interested while still having a good reliable product.

Really the regera is just a better more agressive evolution of this idea using the best parts and materials available and replacing the CVT with a direct drive setup and the clutch with the fluid torque converter which adds gearing in itself so the set up the regera got truly is amazing out of the box crazy.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11342
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Hillhater » Jun 07 2017 8:23pm

Punx0r wrote:
Hillhater wrote: We already have 150kW EV motors weighing < 20kg, so again, not much "low hanging fruit" in that direction either.!
Citation needed... Production, road-going, passenger carrying BEV, please...
.
A quick example of what is now quite an old design ...( and a version of which is used in the Rugera i believe ?)
http://www.yasamotors.com/products/
There are many other similar spec units, and if you really want to see high power to weight,..look up the motors used in the F1 MGU s. Or the new Mercedes super sports road car .
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5513
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Punx0r » Jun 08 2017 8:22am

100Kw @ 24kg, but still very good, I agree.

I said production because I know these motors are out there, but they're not common in end products yet. That to me is low hanging fruit :)

User avatar
wineboyrider   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2753
Joined: Sep 30 2009 9:08am
Location: Tularosa, New Mexico
Contact:

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by wineboyrider » Jun 08 2017 9:45am

ICE loss is from escaped gases to heat. ICE-Steam-hybrid?
ES IS SAVED! THANK YOU JUSTIN.

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5513
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Punx0r » Jun 08 2017 10:07am


burner1   10 W

10 W
Posts: 98
Joined: Apr 15 2013 1:52pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by burner1 » Jun 08 2017 10:29am

There are a variety of advantages and disadvantages to both. Just like there are advantages and disadvantages to a variety of gas -gas cars in how they were built toward their purpose.

It's not a complete apples to orange discussion and really extends to things like what it takes to produce both types of vehicles, mining for and recycling or disposing of batteries.

Btw Jay Leno bought a 1909 Baker electric car from an old lady in Chicago who up to the 1990's was still driving and using it!

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by billvon » Jun 08 2017 11:13am

Ianhill wrote:I'd say a ice engine with a CVT gearbox and electric motor on the output shaft of the gearbox, that way the electric motor/s get the final gear only and can add power, start the engine, or charge the auxiliary battery/ traction battery while nannying the ice engine upto temp.
The first hybrids were similar, although they had the motor on the engine to more easily start it. The Prius is close to what you describe - CVT with a motor on the final gear. It just adds another motor on one of the CVT shafts so that changing the ratio is done electrically, not mechanically.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11342
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Hillhater » Jun 08 2017 6:27pm

Punx0r wrote:100Kw @ 24kg, but still very good, I agree.

I said production because I know these motors are out there, but they're not common in end products yet. That to me is low hanging fruit :)
165 kW peak !
....and this one is 20kg with 155kW peak,..(.the way all power products are sold)
http://www.phi-power.com/phi-power-motor-series/
....and 20kg with 240kW ..
http://emrax.com/products/emrax-268/
The point is, the technology and products are established...Making them "common" or in volume production for general use is a marketing issue.

Edit...forgot the phi & Emrax links.
Last edited by Hillhater on Jun 13 2017 6:11pm, edited 2 times in total.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
spinningmagnets   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11824
Joined: Dec 21 2007 10:27pm
Location: Ft Riley, NE Kansas

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by spinningmagnets » Jun 08 2017 7:26pm

ICE-Steam-hybrid?
Years ago when gasoline was bumping up against $8 gallon (with concerns it might go higher), BMW developed an engine prototype that used a Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) to harvest some of the exhaust heat and apply it to adding power to the engine through a turbine connected to the crank by a fan belt (IIRC).

ORC is basically very similar to a low-temp steam engine, but instead of water boiling at 212F (100C), it uses something similar to a halogenated hydrocarbon (similar to butane), so it boils from liquid to a gas at lower temps than water, doesn't cause rust, and can be cooled to condensation temps by a simple air-fan.

It worked, but...it added complexity and cost (plus one additional failure-mode component).

There were "recovery turbines" in some of the later WWII aircraft that were simply spun by the hot exhaust coming out of the piston/cylinders, and were geared directly onto the flywheel (Wright Turbo Compound R-3350).

If someone wasn't convinced yet that I am nuts, I am a fan of a steam/electric hybrid...(ie: Doble)

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 08 2017 9:02pm

wineboyrider wrote:ICE loss is from escaped gases to heat. ICE-Steam-hybrid?
The engine I learnt all the basic on was the rover k series, one of the first mass production engines to use a layered construction design taking advantage of low pressure sand casting. It came in a range of sizes between 1.1 to 1.8 and 60bhp to 160bhp with a top weight of under 80kgs it was well ahead of its time.
But it did like to blow a head gasket or two allowing oil and water to mix in the block and overheat it's crank bearings then warp the head in the process making it a junker so there's been a few accidental hybrids too and not all increase the range lol.
On a serious note though steam itself is a low performer in efficency and being welsh I do love a good old steam train and learnt it's basics over time with people like Richard Trevithick being born only miles from where I live the steam age still leaves a trace on the people and the area if one looks hard enough along with the coal and steel industry's that the steam allowed to flourish.
We always had snow upto our hips as a child since 2012 there has been nothing significant at all industry has changed our earth alright it's on a tipping point that most are ignorant to and we have be so damn lucky to experience the technologys we have very varied all with in 200 years or so massive change.
In world war one we had horses and primative tanks 30 years later and we end world wars with a nuke so progression is fast and varied who knows the future as doc brown said it is what u make it.

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 09 2017 5:03pm

I know the camless engine is not a first though, A UK company called powertrain ltd did development on a IVA system ( intelligent valve actuation ) and had a working prototype that went to detroit for a motor show display not the best place to take your gas saving idea, I can not trace much more Info on what happened as it all went tits up that year for rover and the webpages are dead with the info just lurkings on mg rover forums now.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11342
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Hillhater » Jun 09 2017 5:15pm

Lots of "camless" high output, engines in use the world over. !
...they are called 2 strokes ! :lol:
....and rotary 4 strokes (Wankel)
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 09 2017 5:44pm

Hillhater wrote:Lots of "camless" high output, engines in use the world over. !
...they are called 2 strokes ! :lol:
....and rotary 4 strokes (Wankel)
Ok clever clogs :), A four stroke piston/s based engine.
I've been researching 2 strokes now funny enough and they are a Dinosaur waiting to be shot all are failing euro emissions due to the nature of the oiling system it's going to burn a mixture of oil and fuel so the mopeds are going to be electric soon in a big way the market is crying out for it.

Same for the wankel engine that burns oil and is not going to see any more action without a major revision in some way.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11342
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Hillhater » Jun 09 2017 9:41pm

Hmm ?, .. Camless 4 stroke piston engines....how about sleeve valve engines ?..or rotary valve engines ?... :wink: :mrgreen:
PS:- not all 2 strokes burn a mixture of fuel/oil, and the oil is not the problem anyway, its the unburnt fuel hydrocarbons that is hard to control for 2strokes (and Wankels)
But direct injection 2 strokes are as clean as any 4 stroke. :wink:
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 09 2017 9:55pm



Good video showing the power of steam vs diesel.

Richard trevithick took the lower pressure steam engine placed it on wheels and upped the steam pressure to create this the first iron horse.
images.jpg
25 years or so later a competition was held too see who could create the best locomotive design with cash incentive George Stephenson came up with the winning rocket among other designs with a story of win by sabotage and spying as only one man could make the boilers and saw all the entry's before hand but nevertheless rocket came out on top.
53962c8946e929e50ab031bcce0714ea.jpg
George Stephenson then went on to be called the father of the railways here in Britain and being a civil engineer as well as enjoying tinkering with locomotive engineering, he went on to create the standard gauge track and forge the bridges and network to carry it, some of which still exist and carry the rail today in places.

In all this steam mentioning I want to correct that the first iron horse was an 8 person bus that failed to win people over due to being a contraption that people raised a pitch fork too, I think james watt should be mentioned the guy who made the first steam preasure engine before that there was only newcomens atmospheric engine very inefficent but there was around 2000 of them made between 1712 and 1800 puming water out of mines and powering mills etc a lowing development driving forward like we see today with fossil fuel damn if you do damn if you don't it's developed our world and understanding but also killing it at the same time.
Last edited by Ianhill on Jun 10 2017 1:43am, edited 4 times in total.

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 09 2017 10:03pm

Hillhater wrote:Hmm ?, .. Camless 4 stroke piston engines....how about sleeve valve engines ?..or rotary valve engines ?... :wink: :mrgreen:
PS:- not all 2 strokes burn a mixture of fuel/oil, and the oil is not the problem anyway, its the unburnt fuel hydrocarbons that is hard to control for 2strokes (and Wankels)
But direct injection 2 strokes are as clean as any 4 stroke. :wink:
Check out the workshops videos on YouTube he goes into depth on two strokes and rotarys of their issues and how direct injection doesn't change the fact the crank is oiled with the port charge so by adding direct injection the crank needs an oil supply then the piston needs an oil control ring and we are losing the squeeze effect that adds efficency to the 4 stroke so it's always on the backfoot unless it's used for racing and rotarys eat oil in a crazy fashion.
Burning oil creates longer chained molecules that are not good for our health you only have to look at the exhaust of a 2 stroke to see there is more smoke output adding oil to the fuel is not cleaner than just burning the fuel never will be.
Last edited by Ianhill on Jun 10 2017 1:32am, edited 1 time in total.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11342
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Hillhater » Jun 09 2017 11:48pm

2 strokes have two big advantages over 4 strokes..
Power to weight ratio
And , Simplicity..fewer components and moving parts.
The most efficient , and most powerful, piston engines made , are 2 strokes !
...and its going to be a very long time before anything electric can replace them :wink:
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: electric vs gas theory

Post by Ianhill » Jun 10 2017 12:05am

Type 2 stroke efficency vs 4 stroke in on Google and this comes up as the answer.
It produces more mechanical power compare to four stroke. In fuel efficiency it's entirely opposite.Four stroke is more fuel efficient than two stroke because it doesn't burnt entire fuel. ... In a 2 stroke petrol engine, due to open ports the fuel efficency is very low as compared to 4 stroke engines

Power increase is the same reason as why theres 250cc 2t vs 500cc 4t in racing, there's twice as many power strokes per crank revolution.
2 stroke throw more unburnt fuel out the exhaust along with the oil fumes burnt and they lack the compression stroke to ensure a more complete burn so alot of fuel and oil reaches the exhaust port then some get ejected to atmosphere some is recycled on the next stroke.
The power to weight of a 2 stroke is fairly decent but the torque is piss poor and electric is already stepping on the toes of all bike be it road, racing, trial or even scooters so it's going to the wall in the end even if I do like the powerband kicking in I have to face facts it's doomed.

Post Reply