Range extender !

[klindholm]

YAREI - Yet another range extender idea......

http://gizmodo.com/strap-this-wind-turbine-to-your-electric-car-and-you-ca-1497320336

Thoughts?

 

[HParkEV]

They must be kidding...
Maybe it can generate a miniscule amount of energy when the car is parked in a windy spot, but that would sure be more than offset by the extra drag it creates when you're driving around. The only way this could work is if it was removable when you drive the car, and even then it would probably not generate enough electricity when the car is parked to make it worth the hassle.
Please don't tell me this thing will generate more power than the drag it creates when you drive with it strapped to your car, because that can only happen in a different kind of universe where our laws of physics don't apply.

 

[fjpod]

I could envision one built into the roof of the car...but to be used as an air scoop when the car is moving, especially at high speed. If it can truly generate 1000 watts as it claims, might it not be enough to get a decent charge while you are moving?

 

[PV1]

While most likely not worthwhile, what about putting these turbines in the grill opening? (The smiling mouth in the bumper?) There is airflow there that is hitting resistance (the radiator), putting drag on the car. Putting these there wouldn't change airflow over the car, just slowing the air before it hits the radiator.

 

[danpatgal]

Yes, totally impractical.

But, your idea might have merit. I don't know how it could be done, but if some of the drag the car would normally incur could actually turn a generator and NOT increase the drag on the car, then you can get some of that energy back ... like regenerative braking. Or, like regenerative braking, only open an air vent with air turbine inside when you want to slow down.

But, probably totally impractical.

 

[Don]

I could envision one built into the roof of the car...but to be used as an air scoop when the car is moving, especially at high speed. If it can truly generate 1000 watts as it claims, might it not be enough to get a decent charge while you are moving?

You wouldn't get any 'charge' because you'd be using more electricity than it generates. If it could generate more energy than it used (more electricity made than the amount of electricity it's presence cost you) then you would be the first person to actually 'invent' . . . . perpetual motion. If you pull that off, you can drive your electric car from coast to coast and never need to stop to recharge

I don't know how it could be done, but if some of the drag the car would normally incur could actually turn a generator and NOT increase the drag on the car, then you can get some of that energy back ... like regenerative braking.

Again, you just described perpetual motion - Getting more energy back than the energy installing the device cost you. None of us know how that could be done

Even if you built a miniature 'car' with a near perfect Cd just to fit one of those 1,000 watt generators, the car's motor is always going to use more electricity moving that wind turbine down the road than the turbine can generate. There are energy losses in the cars propulsion system and also energy losses in the turbine recovering energy from the 75 mph 'wind' the cars motion creates. If you could get an energy efficiency of about 80% (recovering 800 watts while the car is using 1,000 watts) you would be doing very good . . . . but the net result is still a 20% loss, with no net energy being generated - You're still discharging the car's battery more than you are charging it

If you directly linked your electric motor output shaft to the generator's input shaft, you could eliminate lots of inefficiencies. The Cd of the car, the friction of the tires on the road, the inefficiency of the wind on the turbine's blades and you'd probably up your (in)efficiency to 90% or maybe even 95% - You could generate 900 to 950 watts using 1,000 motor watts to run the 'motor-generator'

Don

 

[danpatgal]

I don't know how it could be done, but if some of the drag the car would normally incur could actually turn a generator and NOT increase the drag on the car, then you can get some of that energy back ... like regenerative braking.

Again, you just described perpetual motion Don

First of all - I am as annoyed by the lack of understanding of the Law of Conservation of Energy as anyone, so thank you for debunking the general idea of perpetual motion. I think that regenerative wind turbines deployed, or uncovered/vented, when slowing could get some energy back, just as regenerative braking does, albeit probably at much reduced efficiency, since a second generator would be required, which means if you already have regenerative braking on the main electric motor, why bother with another expensive and redundant way to do that? Verdict: stupid idea.

Now, the other stupid idea was that if there was some way to reduce drag, with say rear teardrop structure, below what was standard on the vehicle, and then add at some increased amount of drag these turbines (but remaining below the original drag), then you'd be doing better than if you did nothing. Of course, you'd do even better without the turbines at all. So, Verdict: even stupider idea.

 

[Kuuuurija]

If you could get an energy efficiency of about 80% (recovering 800 watts while the car is using 1,000 watts) you would be doing very good . . . . but the net result is still a 20% loss, with no net energy being generated - You're still discharging the car's battery more than you are charging it

Please, do not use such high efficiency rates, when talking about windmills!
Betz' law limits the maximum power that can be extracted from the wind to 59.3%. In real life the efficiency is less than 50% even in most ideal conditions.
Large wind mills capture actually less than 10% of the kinetic energy of the air, that move through their blades area.

 

[PV1]

Pretty much any energy recovery technology we apply to a vehicle (regen included) is less efficient than leaving the energy as is and focusing on reducing usage. That's why the order is Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.

Reduce = rather obvious, reduce the amount of energy required to move the vehicle.
Reuse = coast down a hill and use the momentum to roll up the next.
Recycle = Regen, when you've either used too much energy in the first place, or need to "clear out" momentum (stop light, deer runs out in front of you, SUV pulls out in front of you, etc.). Send the energy back to where it came from (battery) to be used again.

We're facing the same dilemma as using Hydrogen as an energy carrier. Besides the better range, lithium ion beats out hydrogen in efficiency, self-discharge, and safety. A hydrogen car has the same or worse efficiency than ICE cars. About half of the energy is lost going from water to H2, and the same for the reverse. There are also transmission losses since hydrogen will leak through metal. So to gain a few more miles range, you are using more than 4 times more energy with hydrogen vs. 90% efficiency for lithium ion with almost no self discharge.

 

[jaraczs]

Pretty much any energy recovery technology we apply to a vehicle (regen included) is less efficient than leaving the energy as is and focusing on reducing usage. That's why the order is Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.

Thanks, PV1. I really like how the idea thread developed down to the core. As a scientist, I really like your description.

Just to build on the crazy idea of wind energy for vehicles, it would be more efficient to convert the wind energy directly into forward motion by installing sail (canvas) on the roof of the vehicle and "sail" on the road like sail boat on the ocean So, if you have head wind, you would have to travel in zig-zag fashion across the road! :lol:

 

[PV1]

it would be more efficient to convert the wind energy directly into forward motion by installing sail (canvas) on the roof of the vehicle and "sail" on the road like sail boat on the ocean So, if you have head wind, you would have to travel in zig-zag fashion across the road! :lol:

I experience a lot of crosswinds, so there may be merit to this.

 

[PV1]

I was thinking more about this. For a BRE (battery range-extender), take one of the salvage i-MiEVs for sale (happened to find one which a VIN sequential to mine! [592 instead of 591], too bad it's already sold), take it down to as bare as it can possibly go and still be able to go to READY, and chop it down to the floorboards to make a glider. Take the front wheels, suspension, and steering equipment off and attach a trailer tongue to the front for towing behind an i-MiEV. Make up a control panel to put in the front i-MiEV with an ignition, possibly a READY light, push-buttons for gear selection, and a form of throttle input to make the i-glider a pusher trailer, using battery power from the pack on the glider. This way, you can nearly double the range and still not use gas. This also wouldn't cost an arm and a leg, depending on the donor i-MiEV you get.

You can even throw a couple of solar panels on top with sheet metal sides to finish it off. Also, get ahold of one of those J1772 splitters to charge both car and trailer from one charging station.

Trailer:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ug9a06tzp3vp7v/Pusher%20Trailer%202.JPG

Trailer hooked to i-MiEV:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/e11f9s70d00fsb3/Pusher%20Trailer.JPG

 

[siai47]

It's a fun thought to work with a salvage I-MiEV however the electronics are so intergrated that it seems even a burned out bulb will keep it from running. The basic problem is twofold. First, if you want to add batteries from a salvage vehicle to build a larger pack, you run into problems getting the cell balancing system into operation. Although this would work for awhile, after a period of time the cells would go so far out of balance that the pack would destroy itself. As to using a partial part of the drive system to provide additional power to the tow vehicle, you would never be able to get the system in a "ready" mode without all of the original components in place and intact. I the case of the salvage car I bought, I could not get a ready light because of the air bag controller determining that an air bag had deployed (non had) due to the G force sustained in the accident. The controller could not be reset (even with a MUT III) and because it is VIN encoded could not be replaced with another salvage unit. The only option was to replace the controller, encode the replacement with the vehicle VIN--a one shot deal--and see if it worked. I wasn't ready to shell out the bucks to try this. Every other code was cleared on the car and temporary repairs would have made it operate for test purposes but I finally reached the end of the line. This is why even with a minor fender bender, these type of vehicles are being totaled.

 

[PV1]

That's what I was wondering, if anybody has tried to achieve READY with parts missing. This i-MiEV has accomplished READY with an airbag deployed and a headlight missing. The turn signal (and possibly AC) is even on.

http://www.easyexport.us/vehicle-finder/lot-30717413/2012-mitsubishi-miev-non-repairable

 

[peterdambier]

It is not as tricky as it seems at first sight.

I have not yet planned to replace things yet. It may be a good idea to log the CANBUS and to see what messages to spoof when things are missing. I am quite sure I'll have to do that one day because I am planning to drive the i-MiEV for a very long time. In the end it will be yet another conversion.

Adding energy - looking where energy gets lost in the first place.

12V system is easiest to do. It looks like the DC-DC draws some 1/3 kilowatt and I am on the road some 4 or 5 hours. So I can add some 2 bars replacing the 12V lead acid with 2 kilowatt hours lithium. It works as if I added those cells to the main battery.

Main battery next. Splicing some 330V DC from a 48V DC-DC converter or directly from yet another 330V battery when "Ready" will look as if I whas consuming less power. This might work even when the main battery has lost capacity.

The hacking will go on.

Cheers
Peter and Karin

 

[olagon]

12V system is easiest to do. It looks like the DC-DC draws some 1/3 kilowatt and I am on the road some 4 or 5 hours. So I can add some 2 bars replacing the 12V lead acid with 2 kilowatt hours lithium. It works as if I added those cells to the main battery.

Are you going to try this? Looks promising. Would love an update if you do. Thanks!

 

[peterdambier]

Update promissed.

My 12V battery must be some 4 years old by now and I do know from hamradio old batteries cost a lot of energy and store little. Lead Acid is dead. NiMH self discharges faster than you can charge them so Lithium is the only way to go.

Cheers
Peter and Karin

 

[PV1]

NiMH self discharges faster than you can charge them so Lithium is the only way to go.

Cheers
Peter and Karin

I disagree with you on this one. I use NiMH batteries for everything. I have one in an analog wall clock that has been ticking continuously for 2 years and has yet to be recharged. When I put it in, it wasn't even fully charged. I also use a pair in a radio that is left on for at least 8 hours every night (I sleep with music on, helps break up the silence), and they last a month on a full charge.

I also have a battery pack for my off-grid solar/wind system made up of 120 AA batteries. Works wonderfully. Measuring SoC is a pain with NiMH, but I usually charge them to 13.5 volts and I can float a couple of days without input.

http://home.earthlink.net/~timster/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/nimh_battery.jpg

 

[Don]

For a 12 volt automotive battery, AGM technology is hard to beat. Compact, sealed, affordable and very low self discharge rates. I've used AGM's for 12 or 15 years on motorcycles, some of which sit for many months between outings and even without keeping a trickle charger on them, they will usually still start the bike. I've also had an AGM in one of my cars for 15 years and about 10 years in the other one. They usually last 7 or 8 years in my experience

When I need a new 12 volt accessory battery for the iMiEV, I'll probably go with a small AGM because for the price, they're hard to beat

Don

 

[olagon]

I also have a battery pack for my off-grid solar/wind system made up of 120 AA batteries. Works wonderfully. Measuring SoC is a pain with NiMH, but I usually charge them to 13.5 volts and I can float a couple of days without input.

Is this cost effective for storage? Looks like an interesting option.