New Electric Scooter Hub Motor nano-crystalline composite

[MitchJi]

Hi,

Unless its a perpetual motion machine it can't be 10x as efficient but is this 100% hype or is it a significant improvement?

http://evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=20875

SYNOPSIS: KLD's hub motor uses nano-crystalline composite materials, which the company believe makes it ten times more efficient than traditional iron core motors.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/20/eco.electricscooter/

EXCERPT:
...
Rather than looking at making batteries more efficient, KLD has improved the performance of the engine itself. The company has built an engine using nano-crystalline composite materials, which it believes is 10 times more efficient than traditional iron core motors, giving an output of 2500 hertz.

Together with a computerized motor control, the KLD engine is compatible with any type of battery. Top speed of the KLD scooter is about 55 mph, which is almost double that of many electric scooters and delivers twice as much torque, accelerating from 0 to 50 mph in ten seconds. The engine also doesn't require a transmission.

The range on a full charge depends on the type of battery used, although in tests KLD says that its motor system extends the distance a battery can go before a charge is required by 40 percent.

Cost-efficiency of components and years of technological development have created the engine KLD has the sole license to produce.

"The nano-crystalline material was developed 20 years ago, but it was incredibly expensive and people couldn't figure out how to use it in a motor. Even 10 years ago a computer, to run this kind of high frequency engine, would have been more like the size of a desk top computer. The magnets we use today that cost 20 cents 10 years ago would have cost $4 to $5," said Okonsky...

 

[fechter]

That's cool. I've thought about doing that for a long time and I'm surprised it took this long for someone to do it. I think the manufacturing cost is prohibitive. It's also brittle and easily damaged by impact.

I think what they're claiming is the efficiency of the 'iron' is 10x better. In a good BLDC motor, the losses in the iron are something like 3-5%. If you reduce this to 0.5%, then it's better, but the overall motor efficiency is only going to be a few percent better.

If your comparison motor uses really cheap, thick iron laminations, the iron losses might be higher, like 10%, so the amount of improvement would be more.

The predominant loss is the resistance in the copper. Nothing you do to the core is going to eliminate copper losses.

At lower speeds where the controller is PWM'ing the waveform, the iron losses might be much, much higher than when the motor is running at full speed. The improvement in core efficiency would have much more benefit under these conditions.