Ok, I am stumped. I ran across a website that had an article about a Scottish man who invented an electric car in the Early 1900's that got unlimited miles. Anyone heard of it? If I can just find that guys name..drats.. Anyway, we do have the technology today. It just has to be the right combination.. Recycling energy is possible and increasing electricity is possible. Transformers, invertors, convertors all do a variety of things, but it drains the main source. However, using a charging system on an EV at the point of least drag and using it at times such as at top cruising speeds, this would make up the difference. Using a charging system (alternator) while obtaining cruising speeds drains the battery faster, but while a vehicle is in motion there is less drag since the motion (gravity, speed) counteracts the drag affect. There will be some, but not much. Just use an Amperage that does not pull so much you have to push on the pedal to keep going. A switch that controls when the charger starts to charge will make a difference and then can be turned on to charge when the vehicle reaches cruising speeds. Anyway, you get the drift. My albums shows a patent of the idea on my profile. Check it out and add or take away anything, I just hope it inspires and brings forth new ideas. Unlimited mileage is just an idea away.
Unlimited Mileage EV's
- Status
1 - 20 of 112 Posts
Joined
·
941 Posts
Hi LeTank. The best thread for this conversation would be this thread.
The description presented shows that you are honestly thinking “outside the box”, not entirely bad. But frankly, the action you describe is what most members of this forum refer to as “regenerative braking”. One could add a dashboard switch to that circuit, if desired. Works well in recouping up to 10% of the energy lost. Personally, I don’t have enough hills or stop signs to warrant the additional cost.
As an un-degreed EET myself, the reason transformers, inverters, controllers, alternators, motors, batteries, etc. get warm (sometimes downright hot) is because of lost energy that can never be recouped under present technology. Again this scenario has been talked about a lot here. Go to the “NuWiki” site here for a wealth of info that EV owners have experienced and fortunately, for others like you, are willing to share so that your EV build will be a success, not a disaster.
http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12241
As an un-degreed EET myself, the reason transformers, inverters, controllers, alternators, motors, batteries, etc. get warm (sometimes downright hot) is because of lost energy that can never be recouped under present technology. Again this scenario has been talked about a lot here. Go to the “NuWiki” site here for a wealth of info that EV owners have experienced and fortunately, for others like you, are willing to share so that your EV build will be a success, not a disaster.
http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12241
I know what you are thinking, but that is not entirely what I was thinking. I was in fact trying to get away from regen-braking and use the ideas of a switch between batteries, while one group of batteries is being charged from a 90 Amp Alternator, the others could be used. I know others want a working vehicle, but I am just saying if you have the time and extra cash (even picking up used parts cheap) then give it a whirl and see what you can achieve. When people start to think its not going to work and nobody tries, then nothing is gained or learned from it. Now the object of using a wind generator motor to recharge batteries is from the low speed charge ability from the wind generator. A few miles an hour will start the generator to charge. You don't need to be flying down the road to make it work. These even start charging at 2 miles per hour. All I am saying is there is a way because we DO have the technology. I am purchasing a wind generaor at the end of this month and will try it and will post what I find on here. Wind generators have hardly any drag...another bonus think about.
Now, the only problem I am finding is where to put the darn thing. haha
I am seriously thinking of doing an in-line axle conversion, but may start with the gear box if I can find a way to slip it in, even if I have to add it on top of everything else and use a belt to run it between the gear box and motor. Would kind of look like a turbo charger on top of the motor.
Well I hope others get the idea. Maybe I should have explained it better.
Now, the only problem I am finding is where to put the darn thing. haha
I am seriously thinking of doing an in-line axle conversion, but may start with the gear box if I can find a way to slip it in, even if I have to add it on top of everything else and use a belt to run it between the gear box and motor. Would kind of look like a turbo charger on top of the motor.
Well I hope others get the idea. Maybe I should have explained it better.
Joined
·
728 Posts
But a 90 amp alternator would draw 99 amps from the motor which would draw 108 amps from the other bank of batteries to do this, using the 10% loss of energy transfer rule.
You'd basically be robbing yourself of 20 amps while driving and would end up with less range.
No one escapes the laws of thermodynamics!
You'd basically be robbing yourself of 20 amps while driving and would end up with less range.
No one escapes the laws of thermodynamics!
I have added to my album, check it out. The second photo shows how you can add a wind generator (that is low drag) that will not take any away from your current power. I explained more about it in the description box.
Enjoy the ideas. Welcome others to speak their minds and give any other ideas that can help others in this subject.
Enjoy the ideas. Welcome others to speak their minds and give any other ideas that can help others in this subject.
Joined
·
74 Posts
Until you find a wind generator that is NO drag, this is a losing equation. The power to move the blades must come from somewhere. It comes from the "wind" created by the vehicle moving through the air. The power to move the vehicle came from the batteries. Running the wind generator and the car at the same time drains the EV batteries more than running the car without the wind generator, because it is "low" drag, but can never be "no" drag.
The same thing goes for any kind of generator. If you are using the car's forward motion to turn the generator, you will lose more power than you make. No amount of switching alternators and batteries in and out will change the equation. The only exception is if you're capturing power that would otherwise be wasted, i.e. Regenerative Braking.
The same thing goes for any kind of generator. If you are using the car's forward motion to turn the generator, you will lose more power than you make. No amount of switching alternators and batteries in and out will change the equation. The only exception is if you're capturing power that would otherwise be wasted, i.e. Regenerative Braking.
How about putting your wind generator in the grille - where the radiator fan used to be? Assuming you've removed all of this and still have it open to allow for cooling of the motor and any batteries you have there. You wouldn't be increasing the drag by much, just putting something in the way before the wind gets to the rest of the stuff thats already in the way.
Here's another (far-fetched) thought... how about a wind generator in which the fan rotated freely, with magnets on an outside fan edge ring creating power in a stationary winding around the housing of the fan.
Here's another (far-fetched) thought... how about a wind generator in which the fan rotated freely, with magnets on an outside fan edge ring creating power in a stationary winding around the housing of the fan.
Joined
·
4,068 Posts
drag is drag.... even with an efficient generator, efficient aerodynamics, low drag wind turbine and an efficient charger, you're still losing out.
lets say 90% eff generator, 90% eff charger... thats what, 81%, then you install it in the grille? well its still air drag, so lets say it decreases efficiency by 5%, then you have to add the drag of the generator on the turbine because its loaded by the batteries...say thats 20% (think regen braking slows you down, because you're loading the motor, it TRIES to slow down) ...thats 57% eff.
I don't know about you, but that does NOT look like a 100% lossless system to me. If you charged one pack of batteries by driving, and only getting 57% back, you just lost 43% of your drive power into your batteries.
You'd be MUCH better off putting those packs in parallel and charging once, but getting a TON more distance out of them. Plus, when you draw less out of the batteries (because each series pack is in parallel), they share current, and the peukert effect is less, decreasing the rate at which the batteries decrease. You would get more distance out of them in parallel than if you were to discharge/switch/charge while driving. Charging one pack off the other pack through mechanical means is NOT an efficient way of doing things.
Why not just share the electrons to begin with... rather than convert electrons to mechanical motion, then mechanical motion to mechanical motion (air to generator), then mechanical motion to electrical energy, then electrical to heat AND electrons to the batteries? Its like a rube goldberg device....
Perpetual motion does NOT exist, and many have tried, but all have failed to prove that a unity gain machine exists. All of them require input, and are less than 100% eff.
lets say 90% eff generator, 90% eff charger... thats what, 81%, then you install it in the grille? well its still air drag, so lets say it decreases efficiency by 5%, then you have to add the drag of the generator on the turbine because its loaded by the batteries...say thats 20% (think regen braking slows you down, because you're loading the motor, it TRIES to slow down) ...thats 57% eff.
I don't know about you, but that does NOT look like a 100% lossless system to me. If you charged one pack of batteries by driving, and only getting 57% back, you just lost 43% of your drive power into your batteries.
You'd be MUCH better off putting those packs in parallel and charging once, but getting a TON more distance out of them. Plus, when you draw less out of the batteries (because each series pack is in parallel), they share current, and the peukert effect is less, decreasing the rate at which the batteries decrease. You would get more distance out of them in parallel than if you were to discharge/switch/charge while driving. Charging one pack off the other pack through mechanical means is NOT an efficient way of doing things.
Why not just share the electrons to begin with... rather than convert electrons to mechanical motion, then mechanical motion to mechanical motion (air to generator), then mechanical motion to electrical energy, then electrical to heat AND electrons to the batteries? Its like a rube goldberg device....
Perpetual motion does NOT exist, and many have tried, but all have failed to prove that a unity gain machine exists. All of them require input, and are less than 100% eff.
Joined
·
4,068 Posts
Ok, you invent a generator that the shaft turns freely while fully loaded, and I think you might win a nobel peace prize.
Think of it like this, you have a generator with no load, it spins freely.... now take a light bulb and turn it, you may not notice a difference. Put 100 light bulbs on it, and I bet that you can't even turn the shaft 5 rotations. Same Idea. Thats for a High efficiency generator (with most of the input power MOST of the energy mechanically is converted to electrical).
Also, putting the "fan" in the grille, won't provide enough wind velocity and force to turn the fins fast enough to generate any useable energy. You think that going 50mph is just going to charge your batteries up at a rate that you're discharging the others? HAHAHA, I don't think so.
And before you discount me, I worked at GE Energy in Salem, Virginia, graduated Virginia Tech with a degree in Electrical engineering with a focus in Automation and Alternate energy Systems. I worked on Wind Turbine control systems, and high power energy conversion systems. You're thinking 100% in from the air to the generator, thats not even CLOSE... try maybe 25-30%.
You're better off paralleling your pack and charging longer.
Joined
·
8,155 Posts
Before you start thinking "outside the box" you better have a good understanding of what is "inside the box". Some of you don't seem to understand the basic fact that any energy you can get from the motion of the vehicle came from the battery pack in the first place and could only be fully recovered in a frictionless, resistance-less world. Of course without friction wheel generators and windmills won't work either 
Yup, I for one couldn't begin to argue with any of the points made. No degree in EE and no experience with EVs. I do believe that thinking out of the box is important. Anyone seen this? http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4224763.html?series=37 Wind powered generator with 1 moving part and no friction, albeit very low power.
Very well suited to fixed location applications, just like other wind generators. Humdinger (Shawn Frayne's company) is experimenting with vertical versions that can be fixed in place and accept wind from any horizontal direction. The best vehicular application I see for that is aboard a schooner, with the vertical oscillating generator built into the mast to generate accessory power when under sail.
Well, some great ideas I never thought of. Anything added to increase mileage is a plus. Wind generators used inside out outside the vehicle will help, but to get the extra bang for the mile I am still looking at a wheel behind the vehicle test or going with the wind generator connected inline somewhere. Either way you have inertia on your side. The most power is used when you first start moving the vehicle, afterwards you only need a sustainable amount of energy to move an object. Even with low drag and you draw say 55 Amps at 55 mph, you at gaining 190 Amps -55 Amps=135 Amps. As an example.. Say it was just even 50 Amps gained at 55 mph, you have enough Amps charging your system at the moment you are still using the other 55 Amps of the total amount gained from a wind generator.
Either way, you gain more than you use. Say you even had a switch box that turned the unit on, or a manual level used to connect the unit to a gear when in motion so you didn't have any drag while obtaining cruising speeds. This way you will still gain Amps by using mass in motion which takes away some of the drag. The Laws of physics are on your side.
There is also the idea of using a smaller Alternator (20 Amp) that has a very small amount of drag and then use a step up convertor to increase the power.
I like the ideas so far, keep them coming.
Either way, you gain more than you use. Say you even had a switch box that turned the unit on, or a manual level used to connect the unit to a gear when in motion so you didn't have any drag while obtaining cruising speeds. This way you will still gain Amps by using mass in motion which takes away some of the drag. The Laws of physics are on your side.
There is also the idea of using a smaller Alternator (20 Amp) that has a very small amount of drag and then use a step up convertor to increase the power.
I like the ideas so far, keep them coming.
Hi Frodus
I like geniuses that have all the answers and say don't try anything because it won't work. Where would we be today without electricity? I'm sure some one said it won't work also. If we don't try new experiments we will stay where we are. Progress is not made by stalemate technology. Look what Tesla went through.
Keep trying Frodus. I'm on your side.
Bernie
I like geniuses that have all the answers and say don't try anything because it won't work. Where would we be today without electricity? I'm sure some one said it won't work also. If we don't try new experiments we will stay where we are. Progress is not made by stalemate technology. Look what Tesla went through.
Keep trying Frodus. I'm on your side.
Bernie
Joined
·
8,155 Posts
I'm sorry, but are you a complete moron
Let me try one more time, any energy "gained" through the motion of the vehicle WAS INITIALLY GENERATED BY THAT VEHICLES POWER SOURCE, be it batteries, gas, whatever! You cannot get back more than you put in, and you can't even get back the same as you put in because of transfer inefficiencies and friction. If you have a wind generator that is giving 55 amps of output you are drawing more amps than that from the battery pack to overcome the added drag of the wind generator. So you're using say 70 amps of battery power to produce 55 amps which means you are using 15 amps more than you are producing, which means a loss of power, not a gain! No "outside the box" visionary ever invented anything that violated the laws of physics. But go ahead and knock yourself out trying.
Joined
·
8,155 Posts
The idea is to not try experiments that have already been done or violate the laws of physics. See my previous post.
1 - 20 of 112 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
