Fords new Hybrid Transaxle

[rkisler]

It's possible that a turbine would be a better energy source, although even there you're looking at such a wide variety of power requirements during a 'typical drive' vs., say, the fairly consistent power requirements of, say, a locomotive engine.

 

When I first joined Ford, they were just shutting down the turbine lab at a time when a lot of people were thinking they would be very useful -- perhaps particularly on trucks.

 

Even though technology has marched on and we now have some cheaper materials to build from, turbines have pros and cons. A pro is that they are relatively compact. The cons are that they are not very fuel efficient, and they spew NOX out in copious quantities. Which means exhaust aftertreatment would be very expensive. So personally, I don't turbines happening.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Austin

[rkisler]

I was thinking a small turbo diesel or some future technology like a hydrogen fuel cell. Since the engine would not be constrained by the operating parameters of a transmission it really opens up the options.

 

There are some manufacturers looking at turbo diesel hybrids in Europe, but they are a very tough sell.

 

Both the diesel and a typical full hybrid both have a very nice feature -- lots of torque at low speeds which makes driveability great. But when you put a turbodiesel with a hybrid, you are putting strength against strength. The present Atkins cycle engine matches weakness on acceleration matched with electric motor assist with economy at higher speeds when the motors kick off, so the Atkins cycle ICE and electric traction motor complement each other nicely. In addition, a diesel would be adding a slew of additonal cost for aftertreatment (as in $1,000-$2,000)..

 

I do wonder, however, if there is any situation where a small displacement EcoBoost would work? Or maybe if you really wanted to push for hybrid economy with gasoline, it might be more likely to have a small supercharged Miller cycle?

 

Fuel cells are an entirely different proposition. Of course, you don't need an ICE with a fuel cell vehicle -- the fuel cell stack produces electricity which powers the car. The main problem with fuel cell vehicles is cost and package of both the fuel cell stack and tank. There are a lot of very expensive materials in the catalyst in the stack (platinum for instance), and you have to use compressed hydrogen which is not readily available except for certain areas in California (hydrogen can only be turned into a liquid at very low temperatures not practical for autos). These cars will be coming on the market in the next few years, but expect price near to $100,000. Ford has done a ton of research and has a connection with Ballard in Canada, but appears to be showing no interest. Looking ahead, CARB believes that hydrogen fuel cells will overtake batteries and represent the majority of electric vehicles sold (in other words, they don't ever see battery technology improving to a point where range extends radically, and charging times reduce substantially). Of course, CARB could give a crap about cost to the manufacturer, particularly if it's a U.S. company, but they are willing to continue to give European manufacturers a sweetheart deal on delaying compliance with zero emission vehicles.

[akirby]

There are some manufacturers looking at turbo diesel hybrids in Europe, but they are a very tough sell.

 

Both the diesel and a typical full hybrid both have a very nice feature -- lots of torque at low speeds which makes driveability great. But when you put a turbodiesel with a hybrid, you are putting strength against strength. The present Atkins cycle engine matches weakness on acceleration matched with electric motor assist with economy at higher speeds when the motors kick off, so the Atkins cycle ICE and electric traction motor complement each other nicely. In addition, a diesel would be adding a slew of additonal cost for aftertreatment (as in $1,000-$2,000)..

 

I do wonder, however, if there is any situation where a small displacement EcoBoost would work? Or maybe if you really wanted to push for hybrid economy with gasoline, it might be more likely to have a small supercharged Miller cycle?

 

Fuel cells are an entirely different proposition. Of course, you don't need an ICE with a fuel cell vehicle -- the fuel cell stack produces electricity which powers the car. The main problem with fuel cell vehicles is cost and package of both the fuel cell stack and tank. There are a lot of very expensive materials in the catalyst in the stack (platinum for instance), and you have to use compressed hydrogen which is not readily available except for certain areas in California (hydrogen can only be turned into a liquid at very low temperatures not practical for autos). These cars will be coming on the market in the next few years, but expect price near to $100,000. Ford has done a ton of research and has a connection with Ballard in Canada, but appears to be showing no interest. Looking ahead, CARB believes that hydrogen fuel cells will overtake batteries and represent the majority of electric vehicles sold (in other words, they don't ever see battery technology improving to a point where range extends radically, and charging times reduce substantially). Of course, CARB could give a crap about cost to the manufacturer, particularly if it's a U.S. company, but they are willing to continue to give European manufacturers a sweetheart deal on delaying compliance with zero emission vehicles.

 

I wasn't advocating fuel cells now - just saying that if you had a fully electric vehicle with a separate ICE generator (whether it was gas or electric) you could convert it to a fuel cell rather simply whereas you could not do that if the generator was part of the drivetrain. Or you could offer multiple options - ICE gas or ICE diesel or fuel cell or whatever.

 

Remember that with a turbo diesel you control the rpm, not the driver which should make it easier to control emissions and/or maximize fuel efficiency.

[RichardJensen]

(in other words, they don't ever see battery technology improving to a point where range extends radically, and charging times reduce substantially)

That's the argument they use. Of course, it's closer to the truth to say that this utterly ridiculous assumption (and I'm sorry, but it is. There's not going to be some miracle breakthrough on hydrogen fuel cells) allows them to draft a model that shows significant reduction in CO2 emissions because these H2 vehicles won't be drawing power from a carbon-fueled power plant.

[rkisler]

That's the argument they use. Of course, it's closer to the truth to say that this utterly ridiculous assumption (and I'm sorry, but it is. There's not going to be some miracle breakthrough on hydrogen fuel cells) allows them to draft a model that shows significant reduction in CO2 emissions because these H2 vehicles won't be drawing power from a carbon-fueled power plant.

 

I agree the assumption is rediculous, and I'm really disappointed to see that the Federal Government (Secretary Chu and the California members in Congress) seem to be bending the research back toward hydrogen where previously funding was slashed.

 

Of course the overwhelming majority of hydrogen gas presently and likely the medium term future comes from...........................wait for it............................natural gas. This steam reformation process has CO2 as a by product. The amount of hydrogen generated totally cleanly by, say, using solar to generate electricity and then using electrolosis to split water is miniscule and not likely to get larger in the near future, particularly with low prices for natural gas.

 

That won't stop CARB from legislating zero emissions vehicles as they have repeatedly said they don't care how much it costs the automakers to comply. These requirements are once again totally stupid in terms of numbers of units required. The requirements likely will way outpace natural demand which will put large financial pressures on those required to comply initially (Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan) and the other manufacturers (like BMW, Mercedes, Audi, VW, Kia, Hyundai) who were all given a break because they are "small manufacturers" based on their California sales and couldn't possibly be expected to tow the line like the "large" manufacturers.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Austin

[Edstock]

Ford has done a ton of research and has a connection with Ballard in Canada, but appears to be showing no interest.

 

IMHO, the lack of hydrogen infrastructure plus intrinsic cost keep it from happening.

 

Meanwhile, direct alcohol fuel cells keep developing. SFC ENERGY makes a variety of interesting direct alcohol systems.

 

[RichardJensen]

That won't stop CARB from legislating zero emissions vehicles

I'm continually irritated by this notion that you can have your cake and eat it too. TANSTAAFL. There are no ways to support the sprawling unhinged suburban California lifestyle that do not have a deleterious effect on the environment.

[mogur]

Actually, it is not the same. It, like my EV, uses a DC inverter that drives a multiphase AC synchronous motor with an overall effiicieny of about 95%. I seriously doubt your scheme for your laptop even makes it to 60% overall efficency... Take a look at the Volt white papers for more info.

 

"de gustibus non est disputandum" notwithstanding, I would not call the Volt system elegant.

In gas-only mode, the system is comparable to occasions when I plug a AC inverter into my car's outlet, and then plug a DC adapter into the AC inverter to charge my laptop. I would under no circumstances describe that as an elegant way to charge my laptop.

[RichardJensen]

Actually, it is not the same. It, like my EV, uses a DC inverter that drives a multiphase AC synchronous motor with an overall effiicieny of about 95%. I seriously doubt your scheme for your laptop even makes it to 60% overall efficency... Take a look at the Volt white papers for more info.

Note that I used 'comparable', not 'same'.

 

laptop charging:

DC to AC to DC

 

Volt on gas-only:

mechanical energy to electrical energy to mechanical energy

 

---

 

Given that the series character of the Volt is its calling card, it gets pretty pedestrian highway mileage when running in series mode with the battery fully depleted.

Edited August 6, 2012 by RichardJensen

[2b2]

...I do wonder, however, if there is any situation where a small displacement EcoBoost would work? Or maybe if you really wanted to push for hybrid economy with gasoline, it might be more likely to have a small supercharged Miller cycle?..

ME TOO! :D

&

since you just kicked me into daydream-mode:

I really want to see (more) VirtualAWDs - ICE on one pair of wheels and electrics on the other with just programming co-ordinating them.

 

&

I wasn't advocating fuel cells now - just saying that if you had a fully electric vehicle with a separate ICE generator...

did you mean a generator-in-a-trailer? like for the FocusElectric?

that's been another of my daydreams...

...make the trailer able to carry extra luggage for a roadtrip too

re-:D

[mogur]

Actually, GM markets the Volt as an EV with a range extender. They do not consider it a hybrid and expect it to be used primarily on battery power. The data from Volt owners suggest that the amount of gas usage is very small... You can see all the documents and technical papers on this on the various Volt forums...

 

Personally, I wanted a pure EV, so I did not consider the Volt...

 

Given that the series character of the Volt is its calling card, it gets pretty pedestrian highway mileage when running in series mode.

[rkisler]

IMHO, the lack of hydrogen infrastructure plus intrinsic cost keep it from happening.

 

Meanwhile, direct alcohol fuel cells keep developing. SFC ENERGY makes a variety of interesting direct alcohol systems.

 

 

Thanks Edstock. I have a friend working for this small company in Ann Arbor on propane fuel cells, initially for the military:

 

http://www.ultra-ami.com/

[RichardJensen]

I know how GM markets the Volt, but the early hype was that this was a series, not a parallel hybrid.

 

Perhaps GM felt that the parallel field was too papered over by Toyota & Ford patents, I don't know. But I have a suspicion that an Energi with a comparable electric-only range would do better on gas only.

 

And as the industry moves toward greater hybrid usage, the limited circumstances of these early adopters will be buried under more conventional usage. And the early returns suggest that a parallel hybrid is more fuel efficient under conventional usage.

[rkisler]

ME TOO! :D

&

since you just kicked me into daydream-mode:

I really want to see (more) VirtualAWDs - ICE on one pair of wheels and electrics on the other with just programming co-ordinating them.

 

Well of course, some manufacturers (notably Peugeot) are using or intend to use a "through the road" hybrid setup where the FWD powertrain stays as is, and a motor/generator unit is placed in the rear with powertrain calibration handling the tough job of sorting out what goes on when. The key advatages are cost and package and the flexibility to utilize existing platforms and powertrains (including potentially diesels). But, I'm not sure we have enough data to see how these will compare to full hybrids from Toyota and Ford.

 

Borg Warner also seems to be going for the "through the road" market.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxzSbTHbK8c

[rkisler]

I know how GM markets the Volt, but the early hype was that this was a series, not a parallel hybrid.

 

Perhaps GM felt that the parallel field was too papered over by Toyota & Ford patents, I don't know. But I have a suspicion that an Energi with a comparable electric-only range would do better on gas only.

 

And as the industry moves toward greater hybrid usage, the limited circumstances of these early adopters will be buried under more conventional usage. And the early returns suggest that a parallel hybrid is more fuel efficient under conventional usage.

 

It seems that way, but it's somewhat hard to tell. GM didn't really get the engine they wanted for the Volt as they were belly up during the later stages of development and had to grab an off-the-shelf engine from Austria. Volt's present operation on gas is certainly no where near equivalent Toyota or Ford efforts, but having a couple of sumo wrestlers on board all the time (i.e. otherwise known as batteries), doesn't help.

 

It really depends on useage. mogur wanted an EV and evidently had a useage pattern where it works. Others probably purchase a Volt with useage that allows them to virtually never operate on gas, so the performance on gas is somewhat irrelevant. Others might have longer drives where a hybrid might be best, or maybe mixed low speed driving where, with care, one can operate primarily on electric with a PHEV like a C-Max Energi.

 

Different strokes.......

Edited August 7, 2012 by Austin

[2b2]

Well of course, some manufacturers (notably Peugeot) are using or intend to use a "through the road" hybrid setup where the FWD powertrain stays as is, and a motor/generator unit is placed in the rear with powertrain calibration handling the tough job of sorting out what goes on when. The key advatages are cost and package and the flexibility to utilize existing platforms and powertrains (including potentially diesels). But, I'm not sure we have enough data to see how these will compare to full hybrids from Toyota and Ford.

 

Borg Warner also seems to be going for the "through the road" market.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxzSbTHbK8c

THANKS for that video, Austin!

 

as for "VirtualAWD" (BW has the name wrong )

imho the hardest part might be finding ways for the driver to have access/control of WHEN the many modes that can be imagined kick in - letting programming decide completely would restrict the benefits too much imho

(worst when approaching 50/50 power for each powersource)

yet if a mode change was needed for safety, it couldn't wait for human reaction times

Edited August 7, 2012 by 2b2

[mogur]

Something like the Capstone turbine comes to mind...

 

It's possible that a turbine would be a better energy source, although even there you're looking at such a wide variety of power requirements during a 'typical drive' vs., say, the fairly consistent power requirements of, say, a locomotive engine.

[mogur]

The replacement ICE slated for MY 2014 should be a big step in the right direction, though still far from optimum...

 

Where the Volt could shine is the use of a more efficient power source (totally disconnected from the drivetrain) that can overcome the energy conversion losses yielding better MPG. This energy source could be swapped out, upgraded or run in parallel to provide more electricity.

[RichardJensen]

Something like the Capstone turbine comes to mind...

Wonder how those are in terms of NOx emissions.

 

I had forgotten that NOx was the big issue with turbines, until Austin's post reminded me.

 

I'm also curious about the potential to run a turbine (which works best at a steady state) at a fixed speed/power output and use the surplus power to charge the batteries.

[SoonerLS]

I had forgotten that NOx was the big issue with turbines, until Austin's post reminded me.

My boss's brother is a pilot in the Marine Corps, and he pointed out another issue that turbines have: a 50,000 RPM rotating assembly. There's a reason they pay a lot of attention to the maintenance on their turbines--if it goes, you're gonna need a heck of a scatter shield...

[RichardJensen]

But--and feel free to correct me on this--isn't the power output related to the amount of inertia inherent in the system? I mean 50,000 RPM vs. 3,000 but still roughly the same amount of energy that needs to be contained, no?