Re: [EVDL] Magnetic Shock Absorber & EV
I'm using 16 T-145's not 105's sorry.
Morgan LaMoore wrote:
> Force of air drag times distance equals energy required
> The lowest Cd I found for a Dodge Caravan was .35, and the lowest area
> was 30 square feet.
> 25.7 kWh
> Energy in 16 T-105's (using 6 hour rate even though he's at 3 hour
> rate, ignoring Peukert's effect):
> 19.7 kWh
> He's only 20% short! However, you have to add in rolling resistance
> losses, he'll be farther behind. It would take a really deep discharge
> to go 150 miles, and you'd be destroying the batteries.
> That said, it was a lot closer than I expected, so if there was even a
> downwards slope of a few percent, they might be able to do it.
> And yeah, the magnetic shocks make sense, if you could get big enough
> magnets. I don't know how they'd help range, though.
> -Morgan LaMoore
> For subscription options, see
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Magnetic-Shock-Absorber---EV-tf4578896s25542.html#a13079765
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
For subscription options, see