e-Traction ® System km per liter liters/100 km - Kivi Niria

wideeyedarmenianElectronics - Devices

Nov 24, 2013 (3 years and 7 months ago)

125 views

Smart

Energy


Mix


Congres

Donderdag

12 oktober 2006

Hogeschool

Windesheim Zwolle

KIVI NIRIA.
Van techniek tot toekomst.


Brandstofefficiency voor
stadsbussen


Ing. Arjan Heinen

KIVI NIRIA.
Van techniek tot toekomst.

Vehicle weight



=

1000 KG


Constant Speed



=

50Km/h


1.
This car needs



1 kW of power


2.
This car needs



5 kW of power


3.
This car needs



10 kW of power


4.
This car needs



20 kW of power



What do you feel is right

How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?


SUV weight





=

1000 KG

Rolling Resistance

10 kg/ton


=

10 KG

Wheel Radius




=

0.3 m

Necessary torque
-

10 x 0.3 x 9.8


=

30 Nm

Distance @ 50 km/h
-

50,000/60


=

833 m/min

RPM @ 50 km/h
-

833m/(0.6m x 3.14)

=

443 RPM






System Efficiency Theory

How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?


.

Power

=
Torque

(Nm) x
Speed

(RPM) /
9550


Power needed to operate an SUV @ 50km/hour


kW =
30 x 443

/ 9550 =
1,34 kW or 1,82 hp





Mechanical Requirement


1,39 kW or 1,82 hp


Auxiliaries and Air Resistance

0,79 kW or 0,81 hp


Total Power Consumption


2,00 kW or 2,58 hp


That is roughly the power of 1,5 coffee machines.

System Efficiency Theory

How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?


The specific fuel consumption of a motor is
0.275 liter per kW

Specific means
fuel in
-

power out,

including efficiency of the motor.


The fuel consumption to operate a vehicle @ 50km/hour for
one

hour



Fuel Consumption =
0.275 (liter/kW) x 2,18 kW= 0,6 liter.


Theoretically such a car should have a fuel consumption of:



1,2 liter/100km or 84 km/liter


System Efficiency Theory

How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?


Reality Check


Theory versus Fact


Manufacturers’
specified
Gearbox Efficiency
:

95%


Fuel consumption should therefore be:




kWh / Efficiency x SFC for 100 km = 2,18 / 0.95 x 0.275 x 2 =


1,25 liter/100 km or 80 km/liter


In
reality

fuel consumption of this vehicle @ 50km/hour is about:



5,5 liter/100km or 18,1 km/liter.


Actual

Gearbox Efficiency

@ 50 km/h:


(1,25 x 0.95)

/
5,5
x 100 =

21%

Vehicle weight



=

1000 KG


Constant Speed



=

50Km/h




1.
This car needs

1,34

kW of power





What do you feel is right

How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?


e
-
Traction
®

System Performance

TNO
Road
-
tests* confirm
Whisper's


energy consumption

* Since March 2005 in simulated passenger service.

liters/100

km

km per liter

e
-
Traction
®

System

City

15.0

6.7

Highway

12.8

7.8

Classic technology

City

45.0

2.2

Highway


33.0

3.3

e
-
Traction
®

System Performance

Mitsubishi
Colt EV test car uses in
-
wheel motors & lithium
-
ion batteries.

energy consumption comparison



liters/100

km

km per liter

e
-
Traction
®

System

City

@50km/uur

1,2

84

Highway

@ 80km/uur

3,2

31,3

Classic technology

City

@50km/uur

5,5

18,1

Highway

@ 80km/uur


5,5

18,1

e
-
Traction
®

System Innovations

Emission reduction: a function of
reduced energy consumption
,

the
e
-
Mission™ Particle Eliminator

and a
silent APU

APU (generator)

Traction System

Pollution control

Batteries

Computerized

Energy Mgt.

Annual

CO
2

Emission Reduction

e
-
Traction
®

powered
Whisper


Bus


Emissions are to a large extend a function of fuel consumption, thus



Annual Fuel Savings:
(annual mileage
÷

current km/l)
-

(annual mileage
÷

Whisper


km/l)


for example: (90,000 km
÷

2 km/l)
-

(90,000
÷

6) =

30,000 liters per year


Annual CO
2

emission reduction:

@ 2.648 kg per liter

of diesel


79.4 metric tons per year

* Currently in testing


already achieving a greater than 80% reduction

The Whisper produces only
(100%
-

66.7%) * 0.8 = 6.7%

of the PM
2.5

particles of an average Dutch city bus.

Particle Reduction of e
-
Traction
®

powered Bus

(with 66.7% reduction in fuel
-
consumption and
e
-
Mission™ Particle Eliminator
*)

Roof
-
mounted container with cyclones, muffler and electronic controls

Receptacles collect carbon
deposits that only need

to be emptied periodically

TheWheel™
: an Electric Direct Drive Wheel
-
hub Traction
-
system

The primary Source of Energy Conservation


90+% of the energy used actually reaches the contact patch with the road

The only moving part!

Tire

Rim

Energy Output @ Contact Patch


VDC
Energy Input

∆ 90+%

Easy mechanical connection to the vehicles. (Quick connects.)

Easy wiring (power supply 2 cables and command through Can bus). (Quick connects.)

Complete drive train in the wheels itself. (no gears).

Complete Power electronics in the wheel itself.

Very high efficiency. (especially @ low speed).

Noise free operation. (variable frequency).

Wheels are sold state. (no maintenance).

Torque control. (speed control available)

Traction control, ABS, Anti rollback, dynamic handbrake, EPS. (implemented by software)

Regenerative braking (less brake wear.).

Dynamic differential.

4 independent drives and Thus more reliability.





Advantages of

in wheel direct drive

e
-
Traction
®

Direct
-
Drive Product Range

e
-
Traction
®
SM350/1, TheWheel™ SM500/1, SM500/2 and SM700/3

e
-
Traction
®

Low Floor Rear
Axle

Compatible with commonly used designs


90 cm wide aisle, 50 cm above surface @ 15 cm ground clearance

Light weight composite e
-
Traction
®

Bus

Fuel consumption certified by TNO

Who decides if this revolution is going to work.

Lets have a closer look at the stakeholders in the chain of
those how will benefit from innovations.




3 different groups can be identified
.

Who decides if this revolution is going to work.

Group number 1

High Priority


A:

Inhabitants of cities and bus users.

B:

Local Governments

C:

Regional Governments / Central Government


Cleaner air.

Less noise.

Lower cost of health care.

Lower cost of transportation.


Who decides if this revolution is going to work.

Group number 2

No high Priority

A:

Bus operators

B:

Bus builders

Risk of innovation.

No back up from the authorities.

No incentive because rules are not necessary to fulfill.

Afraid of cost increase in service and maintenance.

Strong demand in reliability from authorities.

No guarantee that they can keep fuel reduction.

Who decides if this revolution is going to work.

Group number 3

No Priority at all

A:

Chassis manufacturing.

B:

Suppliers of classic technology (motor/gearboxes) (e
-
Traction)

C:

Producer of Hardware like bolts en nuts

.



Risk of innovation.

No connection with the authorities.

Production cost will be higher.

Strong demand in reliability from busbuilder and operators.

Do not benefit from fuel and maintenance reduction.

Have to school new generation of service and maintenance personnel.


Group number 1 decides if this revolution is
going to work.

High Priority

A:

Inhabitants of cities and bus users.

Clean air


less noise

Healthier cities


B:

Local / Regional Governments


Lower cost of transportation


C:

Central Government

Lower cost of transportation

Lower costs of healthcare

Complying to Kyoto rules

Complying to EU regulations


Discussieer mee op


www.DeIngenieurs.nl

KIVI NIRIA.
Van techniek tot toekomst.