Fords' Hybrid path

[twintornados]

Ok...so the Fusion hybrid is off to a good start with wonderful accolades from the media. A thought has occurred to me about other cars in the lineup that could benefit from hybrid technology and more importantly...the type of hybrid system used.

 

I wonder with Ford beating Toyota with a better version of the system in use within Fusion and Escape than Toyota has in their hybrid vehicles, they should look to a similar system that Honda uses (integrated motor assist or IMA design) in smaller cars such as Focus and the upcoming Fiesta. From what I have read, the IMA design is an overall cheaper design to manufacture thus bringing the cost of ownership down to a more reasonable figure. With entry level cars as Focus and Fiesta, this would seem like a more logical approach to keep the lines affordable and increase the fuel efficiency and lower the carbon impact and pollutants that these cars would produce without any "electric" assist.

 

Some thoughts on this idea?

Edited April 23, 2009 by twintornados

[rkisler]

Ok...so the Fusion hybrid is off to a good start with wonderful accolades from the media. A thought has occurred to me about other cars in the lineup that could benefit from hybrid technology and more importantly...the type of hybrid system used.

 

I wonder with Ford beating Toyota with a better version of the system in use within Fusion and Escape than Toyota has in their hybrid vehicles, they should look to a similar system that Honda uses (integrated motor assist or IMA design) in smaller cars such as Focus and the upcoming Fiesta. From what I have read, the IMA design is an overall cheaper design to manufacture thus bringing the cost of ownership down to a more reasonable figure. With entry level cars as Focus and Fiesta, this would seem like a more logical approach to keep the lines affordable and increase the fuel efficiency and lower the carbon impact and pollutants that these cars would produce without any "electric" assist.

 

Some thoughts on this idea?

 

First, I think you need to look at Toyota's Gen 3 HSG in the 2010 Prius and Ford's Gen 2 hybrid system in the Fusion. They are both very good, but I would put Toyota a bit ahead. For example, Toyota has a beltless engine; even the water pump is electrically driven. Toyota also has a relatively sophisticated heat recovery system. These cars are both "full" hybrids.

 

In the Insight, Honda uses an integrated starter-generator which is a small motor that packages between the engine and the transmission. It is cheaper than the Ford and Toyota systems, but it's a case of "you get what you pay for". The motor is only 13 hp IIRC, and it is not capable of powering the car by itself except on coast-down.

 

Since Honda designed the Insight as a dedicated hybrid, it's very tough to determine exactly how much the IMA is adding to fuel economy. Honda marketed the Civic with a 1.8l engine with fuel economy of 26/34 mpg and a hybrid 1.3l with 40/45 mpg. Still no way to really tell.

 

One of the keys with an IMA is to find the package space. IIRC, it takes at least 2-3". That might not seem like a lot, but packaging in FWD products is very, very tight from side-to-side.

 

IMA could be a helpful addition as an option to Ford's smaller cars, but I haven't seen any reports that Ford is working in that direction. It could be a variety of factors including an assessment of the improvement IMA would bring, engineering workload, or a market assessment. And Ford is betting on EB to improve fuel economy.

 

What Ford is really missing in the lineup right now IMO is a purpose-built, uniquely-styled, high-volume hybrid on the order of the Prius and Insight. Ford needs that product to be considered in the same breath as Toyota and Honda.

[Catalepsy]

You have to keep in mind that it is extremely difficult to make money on hybrids. The entire lineup is not going to generate significant amount of income for any car maker. Even the Prius for Toyota lost money until many years into production. Even now it is a tiny drop in the bucket of Yota's billions.

 

It isn't about making hybrids affrodable. More importantly, it is a business: How do you make money on hybrids selling so few vehicles split between Yota & Honda? If you make a low price model, there's even less money to be made, which means you have to sell even more volume. I just don't think the demand exist for it.

 

Regarding Toyota technology...It isn't the hybrid system that significantly changes the mpg calculations. It is the batteries. If Ford puts Li-Ion batteries into the Fusion, the mpg would spike. On the other hand, so would cost and the danger of having to recall every single hybrid to replace a very expensive battery pack because one or two caught on fire.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Its more than just swapping the betteries to Li-Ion. They have markedly different characteristics than NiMH batteries meaning that it requires a new control system, different charging strategies, and rethinking the packaging as well since they have a somewhat different optimum form factor. The other issue with them is that they aren't "worlds" more efficient than regular NiMH batteries, especially since NiMH batteries are considered a very mature technology and Li-Ion batteries are still being developed, especially for this application. Their biggest advantage is a wider operating range flexibility than NiMH and greater charge durability. IT is expected that as they continue to be developed, they will also have a higher charge density than NiMH, but, in their generation 1 guise, the difference will be negligible.

 

Ford doesn't need a completely different platform for a hybrid, they need to start with an existing platform and optimize the final product through every design phase for hybrid operation. For the Fusion update, they made accomidation in the design to deal with making it a hybrid. Same for the escape... I believe that the elictric focus will have more fundamentaly design revisions, but it will still share much with a regular focus of similar layout.

 

Out of everything, I'm most interested in seeing the next generation of Ford's hybrid system. I feel that if they can base it off of an EB 1.6L engine instead of the 2.5L, they will make a noticeable increase in overall system efficiency. Couple that with the expected shift to Li-ION batteries and you could be looking at an overall mileage rating improvement of over 25-30% if all other variables are kept the same.

[OHV 16V]

...What Ford is really missing in the lineup right now IMO is a purpose-built, uniquely-styled, high-volume hybrid on the order of the Prius and Insight. Ford needs that product to be considered in the same breath as Toyota and Honda.

 

I agree. A sort of flag-bearer with unique styling, a unique name, and the Fusion Hybrid's IP would be a great thing.

 

Just a thought here... It may not be financially feasible, but why not a Fiesta Hybrid too? Yes, the Fiesta gets good mileage already, but imagine what that would do towards the overall CAFE numbers. Not to mention the superb (almost ridiculous) numbers you could use in the marketing? The public would find such numbers in fuel economy almost too good to be true, especially if you could use an even smaller 4-cylinder (One of the European ones?) to pair with the electric motor.

 

Again, I realize profitability would be an issue, but, like we've said, hybrids aren't a numbers-winning game..

Edited April 23, 2009 by OHV 16V

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I believe that in the mid term, ford may be eyeing one of the tiny EB motors for use in the fiesta (1.4L I-4 or 1.3L I-3 or something else in that range). That will give extremely good mpg and not need hybrid gear. Rememeber, the hybrid stuff adds a good bit of weight to a car. Once cars go below a certain threshold in weight, just converting them to hybrid may not be the gain we all imagine.

 

Therein lies the rub. The Fiesta platform, whatever it is, may be a good starting point for a vehicle that is designed from the beginning to be a hybrid only vehicle. Given its small size and resulting light weight, a properly designed and scaled hybrid setup would work well in it. Just remember, the hybrid setup that Ford uses right now is sized for a particular application size range. I don't believe that it has enough flexibility to be coupled with different engines or battery array sizes yet. (I may be thinking of Gen II in battery array size). It would definitely be too large for the fiesta at this point.

 

Another idea is perhaps a mild hybrid for the Fiesta, but, that would take its own gargantuant investment in R&D, which would be counterproductive in that price range.

[OHV 16V]

Good point on the added weight, I forgot about that detail. In a way, "hybridizing" a vehicle is kinda like adding AWD, it provides a specific benefit with the detractor of added weight.

[NickF1011]

Good point on the added weight, I forgot about that detail. In a way, "hybridizing" a vehicle is kinda like adding AWD, it provides a specific benefit with the detractor of added weight.

 

At this point, hybrid is also somewhat like AWD in that the platform has to be capable of supporting the system. Not every vehicle in Ford's lineup can just have a hybrid powertrain "plugged in" to it without some significant alterations.

[jpd80]

While Hybrids have a high media profile, sales are still quite low in compared to conventional vehicles. Downsize and boost is a concept that is easier to market than hybrid and I think that Ford will achieve more for its customers by providing increased efficiency through Ecoboost technology.

 

Having smaller turbo engines with plenty of low end torque coupled to 6 speed transmissions is going

to win over even the most cynical critic and doing Ecoboost in front of Hybrids enables buyers to get the most bang for bucks. With gas prices still relatively low, I think the immediate emphasis is off fuel

consumption a bit, what the consumer is probably looking for now is efficient power - not ultimate fuel economy.

 

So rather than pressing forward with a mass roll out of a Prius beater, I think Ford will do better with the Ecoboost strategy giving broader improvement in fuel economy to many of Ford's customers.

Edited April 23, 2009 by jpd80

[Critic]

Personally Ford did a great job, with the Hybrid Escape, I have one. One of the first. It was wise to take a truck platform to hold the heavy weight of the battery's, + 5 people. Change the crankshaft for a longer compression and different valve timing. They had to add the regenerative brakes, and a different Transmission, and the Electronics to wrap it all together in about 3 years. Guess what. it works!

 

They had to start somewhere and that was the chosen path. HOWEVER the part about battery's being the sticking point has always been wrong, the truth is how much are you willing to lose on each sale?

 

The fusion is step 2. ECO-BOOST step 3. and the SUV's cover step 4. I would not like to see them put all their eggs into one basket. BUT halting further design and thinking that pure EURO cars will be good enough for the USA doesn't sound wise. Not really true, I know, but too many think the Fiesta is a life-savor, It will just elicit a yawn after about 6 months on the market. I know I generalized a lot here, but these are just one humble critic's opinion, nothing more, nothing less. That is what Critic's do, generalize things, it's our job.

[ausrutherford]

4 BEV vehicles

3rd generation Hybrid system

90% of vehicles offered with EB

Plug-in system

 

...all this is by 2013...and is official.

[mustang_sallad]

The other issue with them is that they aren't "worlds" more efficient than regular NiMH batteries, especially since NiMH batteries are considered a very mature technology and Li-Ion batteries are still being developed, especially for this application.

 

 

I'd say Li-ions are significantly more efficient. NiMH has a coulombic efficiency of 66%, which means that 34% of the energy you put into them while charging goes into heat. Li-ion is up around 99.9%, so they stay cool while charging. Try it with your laptop, charge it without running anything else and it should stay pretty cool.

 

This is of course more of an issue with BEVs, where that 34% would represent 34% of your total driving costs. With a hybrid system, the battery gets charged up and down frequently throughout the drive, but its not like all of your gas gets converted into electricity and used to charge the batteries, but I would imagine it still has a pretty strong effect. We've all seen the vents they put on NiMH hybrids. My guess is a li-ion hybrid wouldn't need this. Li-ion BEV might be a different story though...

[twintornados]

Again...my thought train runs along the lines that Integrated Motor Assist is cheaper, has less weight, and is less complicated than "Synergy"...so that lends to wondering if the use of IMA in lines like Focus and Fiesta would make more sense.

[battyr]

I'd say Li-ions are significantly more efficient. NiMH has a coulombic efficiency of 66%, which means that 34% of the energy you put into them while charging goes into heat. Li-ion is up around 99.9%, so they stay cool while charging. Try it with your laptop, charge it without running anything else and it should stay pretty cool.

 

This is of course more of an issue with BEVs, where that 34% would represent 34% of your total driving costs. With a hybrid system, the battery gets charged up and down frequently throughout the drive, but its not like all of your gas gets converted into electricity and used to charge the batteries, but I would imagine it still has a pretty strong effect. We've all seen the vents they put on NiMH hybrids. My guess is a li-ion hybrid wouldn't need this. Li-ion BEV might be a different story though...

 

I did not believe this so I looked up the definition of coulombic efficiency. In a hybrid, the coulombic efficiency varies dependinng how fast you charge the battery. If you are doing a slow charge, NiMH would have a coulombic efficiency that is much, much better. But you are right, during fast charge from regenerative braking, MiMH is very bad. To fix it would require over sized batteries.

 

In the case of Li-ion batteries, it depends on the particular technology used. The newer chemistries of Li-ion are claimed to perform very well.

 

Ford is claiming a 30% saving from it's new generation Li-ion batteries and energy savings. This would be from improved coulombic efficiency allowing the use of much smaller, more efficient batteries.

[battyr]

Before you can discuss the different pathways, you must understand why Synergy is more expensive than a IMA designs.

 

IMA uses a convensional transimission. The Synergy uses an E-CVT, which is actually a much simpler design. The only reason why a e-cvt would be more expensive is be cause it is built in low volume and only supplied by one plant in Japan. This will change as sales increase.

 

Synergy also allows you the take more advantage of the electric system. This means you can spend more money on larger electric motors, voltage regulators and batteries to get better fuel efficiency. This is not needed. There is no reason why a synergy system can't be built with a larger gasoline engine and smaller electric motors, regulators and batteries. This is the case for Toyota's non-prius hybrids.

 

I think other manufacturers use the IMA like systems because 1. they don't have the technology for a synergy type system, 2. IMA is cheaper in the short term. I think, if Ford keeps working on a Synergy type system, they could get real good results in the future. On the other hand they have to keep a good eye on all technology.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Honda uses IMA because for smaller cars with inflexible platforms, it is easiest to package and cheaper to produce. Honda already has a whole heap of pattents on it from their 1990s development on the 1st generation insight. All they are using now is just a further development of that same system. Their one HUGE misstep in all of this was the Accord Hybrid. It used some sort of expanded IMA system from what little I know about it and it never did give them the gains that the public thought it should have. I firmly believe that they could have gone a much simpler route and employed a similar system in the Pilot and odyssey and gotten better overall results. Again, though, their system has one significant handicap up to this point, it is VERY limited in its ability to power the vehicle down the road. I don't know if this was improved upon with the new insight.

 

As for being able to ram a charge into Li-ION batteries quickly, there are still limits there. The power that's gotten from regenerative braking still comes too fast to be dumped directly into the batteries. I remember one of the schematics that I saw for an early synergy type system had a significant amount of capacitors to deal with just that fact. I don't know if charging strategies have changed over time, or if they bank the batteries and use the usual electrical circuit bag of tricks to change the voltage to what they want, but, they have gotten better at managing the heat issues with NiMH batteries over time. At any rate, these improvements in their ability to manage NiMH battery charging, coupled with the minor improvments that have been made to the NiMH batteries over the years, have led to a very efficient employment of those batteries in current hybrid systems. While Li-ION batteries are better able to handle what's thrown at them, the engineers have gotten very good at managing NiMH batteries in the meantime.

[Devodev]

Good point on the added weight, I forgot about that detail. In a way, "hybridizing" a vehicle is kinda like adding AWD, it provides a specific benefit with the detractor of added weight.

 

...adding weight and adding $$$ as well. If they are willing to dip into margins, then maybe...but I don't think anybody can afford to do that right now. There's a push for American's to be willing to pay more money for technology and fuel efficiency, but we aren't there yet. A couple extra grand on a Fiesta or Focus might just shift customers elsewhere. However I'm sure the marketing dept. would love to be able to advertise 50mpg.

[battyr]

Honda uses IMA because for smaller cars with inflexible platforms, it is easiest to package and cheaper to produce. Honda already has a whole heap of pattents on it from their 1990s development on the 1st generation insight. All they are using now is just a further development of that same system. Their one HUGE misstep in all of this was the Accord Hybrid. It used some sort of expanded IMA system from what little I know about it and it never did give them the gains that the public thought it should have. I firmly believe that they could have gone a much simpler route and employed a similar system in the Pilot and odyssey and gotten better overall results. Again, though, their system has one significant handicap up to this point, it is VERY limited in its ability to power the vehicle down the road. I don't know if this was improved upon with the new insight.

 

As for being able to ram a charge into Li-ION batteries quickly, there are still limits there. The power that's gotten from regenerative braking still comes too fast to be dumped directly into the batteries. I remember one of the schematics that I saw for an early synergy type system had a significant amount of capacitors to deal with just that fact. I don't know if charging strategies have changed over time, or if they bank the batteries and use the usual electrical circuit bag of tricks to change the voltage to what they want, but, they have gotten better at managing the heat issues with NiMH batteries over time. At any rate, these improvements in their ability to manage NiMH battery charging, coupled with the minor improvments that have been made to the NiMH batteries over the years, have led to a very efficient employment of those batteries in current hybrid systems. While Li-ION batteries are better able to handle what's thrown at them, the engineers have gotten very good at managing NiMH batteries in the meantime.

 

I am not convinced that IMA is necessarily more compact. With IMA you have to add an electric motor and generator to a convensional engine and transmission. Ok, you could replace the starter with a slightly larger electric motor and replace the alternator with a larger generator, but it still takes up more room. With a synergy drive type system, you are replacing a complex conventional transaxle with an integrated e-cvt. The cvt part is very simple and very compact. The whole e-cvt unit contains the motor and generator and does not need to be any larger than a conventional transaxle. With more electric power, the gasoline engine can be smaller in a synergy system.

[Critic]

Isn't the current starter an integrated starter/generator?

[battyr]

Isn't the current starter an integrated starter/generator?

 

I think in many IMA systems, they use an integrated starter/generator. They still have to have an alternator for 12 Vs.

 

In think the synergy system uses an integrated starter/motor/generator plus an additional electric motor all as part of the e-cvt. I don't think it has an exteral starter. It still has an alternator for 12 Vs.

[rkisler]

I am not convinced that IMA is necessarily more compact. With IMA you have to add an electric motor and generator to a convensional engine and transmission. Ok, you could replace the starter with a slightly larger electric motor and replace the alternator with a larger generator, but it still takes up more room. With a synergy drive type system, you are replacing a complex conventional transaxle with an integrated e-cvt. The cvt part is very simple and very compact. The whole e-cvt unit contains the motor and generator and does not need to be any larger than a conventional transaxle. With more electric power, the gasoline engine can be smaller in a synergy system.

 

First, let's put GM's cheapie design with a belt driven device off to the side.

 

For the Ford and Toyota systems, I do agree that the e-cvt packages well for FWD cars, but there is extra mass where the two motors reside on the side.

 

An integrated starter-generator is pretty compact. It consists of a motor "ring" that fits between the engine and the transmission, and takes about 2-3" of package space for a vehicle like the Honda. This device, as the name implies, starts the engine, provides a motive assist, and is used to recharge the batteries -- both through the engine and through regen braking.

 

Of course you still have to find room for the batteries. And packing 2-3" crossways is not necessarily easy for a FWD product (but might work, for instance, on a Mondeo which already packages a 5 cylinder sideways).

 

There are some downsides to the Honda system. The small motor (13 hp) is not capable of powering the car from startup, but is only capable of powering in coastdown and providing some launch assist. Since the electric motor surrounds the engine output shaft, the engine is always spinning. I think I am correct that Honda closes the valves to reduce pumping losses under coastdown. So, because the IC engine runs more frequently, the system is not as efficient as the full hybrids offered by Ford and Toyota.

 

The major benefit is cost.

 

ISG's can be made more capable. But that means they have to get bigger/longer which is a big problem for a FWD car. Porsche is going to be introducing an ISG which will be capable of powering the vehicle and involves clutches to totally disengage the IC engine. But...that's a longitudinal powertrain. They have more room to play with. And more ability to get customers to pay for the technology.

 

Of course Ford is fully aware of ISG's and what they can and can't do. While they could offer some benefit on small cars, it doesn't look like it's being pursued as Ford is using its engineering resources in other areas that the company believes will yield a better result.

[battyr]

Or you can just use Mazda's Stop/Start System.

[Quince]

I think in many IMA systems, they use an integrated starter/generator. They still have to have an alternator for 12 Vs.

 

In think the synergy system uses an integrated starter/motor/generator plus an additional electric motor all as part of the e-cvt. I don't think it has an exteral starter. It still has an alternator for 12 Vs.

 

The Hybrid Synergy Drive and Ford Hybrid System both use the Power Split Device. It does not need an external starter and has no alternator.

 

The Power Split Device meshes two AC electrical motor/generators (MG1 and MG2) and the gasoline engine through a single planetary gearset.

 

MG2 is the big electric motor (90hp in the Fusion Hybrid, 60hp in the Prius) that turns the outer ring gear in the planetary gearset, and the outer ring gear directly drives the car's front wheels. (that is why the PSD system does not need a clutch or a torque converter, since the electric motor can exert maximum torque starting at 0 RPM, which a gas engine cannot).

 

MG1 is the smaller 20hp electric motor that turns the sun gear in the middle of the planetary gearset. It acts as the starter motor (draws power from the hybrid battery) to crank the gasoline engine into motion whenever the gas engine is needed.

 

The gasoline engine spins the middle planetary gears (through the planetary gear carrier) in the PSD planetary gearset.

 

 

No separate alternator is needed because both MG1 and MG2 can act as electrical generators. MG2 can generate AC electric power when you step on the brake pedal, which converts the car's forward momentum into storable electricity. MG1, providing countertorque when the gasoline engine is turning, acts as a generator as well. The hybrid system includes a solid state inverter which can convert the AC power generated by MG1 and MG2 to DC for storage in the hybrid battery, or vice versa from DC to AC when MG1 and MG2 are running as motors. 12V needed by other systems in the car comes from the inverter too. The entire electrical system is managed by the computer.

 

A huge side benefit of the PSD system is that the big MG2 motor can do the majority of the work in braking a car, saving brake pad wear tremendously. That is why cars like the Fusion Hybrid and Prius don't need to have their brake pads changed until well after 100,000 miles. (Not a typo.) Try that in a normal auto-tranny car and see what happens. :P

 

 

That's the beauty of the Hybrid Synergy Drive / Ford Hybrid System. It is so incredibly simple, mechanically. The complicated part is the software and electronics that controls it all. How the Power Split Device system works: http://www.eahart.com/prius/psd

 

 

The Honda IMA system is mechanically more complex with a conventional engine and transmission. It merely replaces the Transmission flywheel with a small disc-shaped motor/generator of the same size, and adds a battery pack in the back of the car to work with that small disc MG. It's simpler to integrate into a car because it builds on existing transmission and engine technology, and requires a much smaller battery pack because the MG is so small. Interesting note: The new Mercedes S400 BlueHybrid uses this IMA implementation, but I'm not sure if they have to pay Honda any royalties.

 

To summarize, the IMA system is much closer to a normal car, while the PSD system is much closer to an electric car.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Quince