Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The whispering wheel [Dutch invention can make vehicles 50 percent more efficient]
Radio Netherlands ^ | 15 december 2003 | by Thijs Westerbeek,

Posted on 12/16/2003 5:29:21 PM PST by aculeus

A new Dutch invention can make cars, busses and other vehicles no less than 50 percent more efficient and thus more environmentally friendly. Better still, the technology is already available; it all comes down to a smart combination of existing systems.

This winter, in the city of Apeldoorn, a city bus will be used to prove that the claims about the new invention are true. These are quite bold. E-traction, the company that developed the bus, boasts fuel savings of up to 60 per cent, with emissions down to only a fraction of the soot and carbon dioxide an ordinary bus would blow out of its tailpipe.

In addition, the test bus requires no adaptation, its drivers need no extra training and there'll be no discomfort for passengers. It will simply run on diesel, just like all the other buses, and it should be just as reliable. One thing however will be very different; the Apeldoorn bus hardly makes a sound, hence its nickname "the whisperer".

In-wheel engine

All this is made possible by an ‘in-wheel' electric engine, in fact nothing more than a normal electric engine turned inside out.

The outer wall of a traditional electric engine is a cylinder lined on the inside with copper wire. If electricity is fed into the copper wire, the current will circle the cylinder on the inside at high speed. Cylinder and wire together are called the ‘stator' (because it doesn't move).

To change the electricity running along the inner wall of the cylinder into movement, another part of the engine comes into play: ‘the rotor'. This is in fact an axle, mounted in the centre of the cylinder, with permanent magnets attached to it. The electrical current in the stator pulls the rotor magnets along and the axle starts to turn.

The wheel works precisely the other way around. The fixed part of the engine - the stator - is now on the inside. The wire is wrapped around it.

The moving part of the engine – the rotor - is no longer an axle fitted with magnets but a ring running on the outside of the stator.

The magnets are fixed on the inside of this ring. If power is fed into the engine the magnets will – as before - follow the current, but now it's the ring on the outside, which will turn.

Eureka

And that's what makes ‘the whisperer´revolutionary; a ring functioning as a wheel. By just putting a tire on it you can drive a bus, a car, anything with it. Since the wheel is in fact the engine, no axles or any other friction-producing and therefore energy-wasting mechanical parts are needed.

Even the transmission is unnecessary; if you want to go faster you just run more electricity through the engine. And it works really well while braking, when the in-wheel engine works as a generator, produces electricity to charge the batteries.

Pack of Batteries

The power to drive the Apeldoorn bus is stored in a big battery pack that sits in a steel drawer under the bus. Changing the batteries every time they're drained would be impractical, as would be taking the bus out of service for recharging them for hours on end. Instead, a small diesel-powered generator built into what used to be the bus's engine bay continuously charges the whole battery pack.

Since in-wheel engines are so highly efficient, the generator's diesel engine can be very small, about the size of the compact city car's engine. Because charging the batteries is all it needs to do, the tiny engine consumes very little fuel and can run continuously at a speed of 1700 revs per minute, the most efficient rev count.

Clean and quiet

Passengers will find it more important that the bus is quiet and clean. No more roaring buses pulling away from the station in a cloud of diesel fumes. When the whisperer pulls away (and whenever it drives for that matter), the power comes from the batteries, not the diesel engine which simply keeps on purring quietly.

Furthermore, the constant rev count makes the catalyser much more effective, and the small size of the engine makes it possible to completely fill the rest of the engine bay with sound proofing. Being 90 percent quieter than other buses, the ‘whisperer' really deserves its name.

Testing period

In the coming six months the bus has to prove itself in everyday practice. Come summer, the city of Apeldoorn is set to decide whether to use whisperers on a larger scale in public transport. Dr Arjan Heinen, inventor of the whisperer and director of E-traction, radiates confidence: "This is a practical solution for present-day public transport. Every bus driver can get behind the wheel and do his job as before, only now it's quiet, clean and energy-efficient."

The future of the in-wheel electric engine seems bright. At the recent Tokyo Motor Show, it was the engine of choice in many of the futuristic hydrogen-powered concept cars.

© 2003


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; environment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last
To: Lancey Howard
I'm actually getting sick of the sound, moreso the ambient noise that combines with the engine and makes me have to crank up the radio to hear anything.

Give me an SUV with no wind noise and one of these motors, and as long as it has a GVWR that will get me a section 179 deduction, I'll buy it. If I want to hear the noise of an engine I'll buy something like an olds 442 for fun.
61 posted on 12/16/2003 7:48:52 PM PST by flashbunny (The constitution doesn't protect only the things you approve of.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: expatpat
The concept of using electric motors at the wheel is really not new. LeTourneau built some really big front end loaders with a diesel running a generator which in turn powered electric motors at each wheel. These didn't use batteries as far as I know. Many diesels don't rev much over 1700 and from what I have seen, neither do generators.

By the way, this is not one of the big loaders

62 posted on 12/16/2003 7:53:27 PM PST by Colorado Doug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Colorado Doug
Here is a BIG one!


LeTourneau is an American company, not french

63 posted on 12/16/2003 7:57:17 PM PST by Colorado Doug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Almost all electric motors are very efficient (better than 95%), as well as quiet. Small diesel generators are also quite efficient. Hybrid vehicles such as this have been around for decades. The issue is not efficiency, it is cost.

These vehicles are quite expensive, and battery replacement adds significant maintenance expense. Reduced maintenance batteries like nickel metal hydride are currently much too expensive in the energy density required for busses. This concept needs break throughs in cost, not technology.
64 posted on 12/16/2003 8:08:36 PM PST by norwaypinesavage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Capitalist Eric

An engine converts chemical energy into mechanical energy, while a motor converts electrical (or magenetic) energy into mechanical energy...

Unless it's a solid fuel rocket -- which is called a rocket motor.

65 posted on 12/16/2003 8:16:20 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: templar
I am kind of a techno-geek, and have purchased some of those "rare earth" magnets to play around with. They are awesome and expensive! One about 1.5" dia.x .5" thick is about $12 surplus price. They are actually dangerous to play with! It cannot be removed from a piece of metal without a pair of vice-grips. If you get two of them that size close enough to attract each other, any flesh between them is coming off in a very painful fashion, which will need to be relieved with a helper with a pair of vice-grips! Great for fridge magnets too, no need to stick a picture of your kid up...just stick the kid.
66 posted on 12/16/2003 8:19:13 PM PST by Boiling point (Too well informed to be a democrat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Apeldoorn

67 posted on 12/16/2003 8:19:40 PM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
A relatively small tank of compressed air will drive a city bus using a simple air-piston engine. This, too, could recover energy from braking. Too simple, though, to make somebody $100 Billion.
68 posted on 12/16/2003 8:21:00 PM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeltaZulu
. A deisel engine delivers DC directly to the wheels. As an added benefit reversing the current makes for a great non-mechanical braking system. This stuff has been around for many years. I wonder why they cant make a car like this?

The diesel-electric trucks work on exactly the same principle as locomotives. The energy is delivered directly to the motors driving the wheels. There is no energy storage in batteries, except for the incidental storage for starting and housekeeping electricity--just like the battery of an ordinary car.

In this scheme the only thing the generator-motor replaces is the transmission. As I said current locomotives still work this way. The design has not changed since the early 1900s, and old electric motors from that era are still rebuilt.

The advantage is that for handling large amounts of power this is more efficient than a mechanical transmission.

69 posted on 12/16/2003 8:21:06 PM PST by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: slowhandluke

The idea has been around. I remember looking at this in a Popular Science article sometime in the mid-60's for a high-school science report.

I may have read the same article. But the electric motors were conventional and he used a gas turbine engine instead of a diesel.

70 posted on 12/16/2003 8:25:23 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Years ago Mother Earth News ran an article about a guy who put an aircraft starter motor in a pickup and ran it off of a generator driven by a 4 cycle gasoline engine, in the bed against the cab. He didn't use batteries; he just started up the engine.


71 posted on 12/16/2003 8:26:38 PM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Panzerfaust
Still got those Ram Air IV heads? I'll buy them off you.

Sorry, they're long gone, as well as the rest of the car. I think that I traded it in on a Mercury Lynx wagon, back around 1985. Big dissapointment! I miss that car. It was a blast to drive, and I had really done quite a bit as far as performance mods...

It took quite a while, but eventually I got all sorts of great mods onto that car. Little things like those heads, a Holly 650CFM double pumper carb, I opened up the ram air scoops in the hood, although I didn't buy the ram air kit to make a pressurized air-box. Mr Gasket low rise air cleaner, OFFY low rise intake manifold, I can't remember the brand of the headers, but they had these anti-backflow cones in them. But the coolest part of the mods was a Doug Nash 5 speed transmission, and I changed the rear gears from the stock, I believe 3.4x to 2.6x (can't remember the exact numbers). The DN transmission was an underdrive, with a super low 1st gear. I had amazing power in first gear, but would up getting even better mileage on the highway. After the rear change and DN installation, I was getting almost 19MPG on the highway!

I really do miss that car... I was once clocked by the NY State Highway Patrol at 137mph, and using a stop-watch, I was able to go from 0 to 60 in less than 4.5 seconds! And the car handled GREAT!!! Goodyear Wingfoots, and the car had the TA handling package!

That car really had "sound and fury!" Going to the Lynx gave me lots of sound, just no fury... :-(

Mark

72 posted on 12/16/2003 8:27:05 PM PST by MarkL (Dammit Vermile!!!! I can't take any more of these close games! Chiefs 12-2!!! Woooo Hoooo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel
The diesel engines in locomotive service run at a low rpm - 750 to 1000 rpm range, in most cases. Keep in mind that these are also high displacement engines. For example, a GM-EMD 16V-710 will run about 4000 hp using a turbocharger at that rpm range, but that's also with 710 cubic inches per cylinder. Some rail diesels run at higher rpm's, however that is either due to lower displacement (such as some locomotives re-fitted with Caterpillar engines), or the alternator is also being used for passenger train power (typically 480V 3ph in US service for modern "head-end power" rolling stock). The latter is why the F40PH's used by Amtrak and some commuter agencies sound like they are running at max rpm - constant rpm to maintain the 60 Hz. The power output for this setup is changed by adjusting the excitation on the alternator field windings and the fuel rack settings on the diesel.
73 posted on 12/16/2003 8:31:03 PM PST by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Boiling point
They are awesome and expensive! One about 1.5" dia.x .5" thick is about $12 surplus price.

I picked up one about two years ago that is about 2 inches by 1 inch by 1/2 inch, about 25 bucks. The only way to get that thing off of a piece of steel is to slide it off the edge, it's gotta have hundreds of pounds of pull. Place it under a slanted board and roll a dime down the top of board and the dime will almost stop as it passes over it! Whatever you do, do not get it near a TV screen (trust me on this).

74 posted on 12/16/2003 8:31:25 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: MarkL
Actually, water injection just boosts octane by scavanging the free radicals. It does work (I put one on a Corvette years ago.) It doesn't directly produce more power but it would allow a higher compression ratio which does produce more power with greater efficiency. (Unfortunately, it also raises the oxides of nitrogen to an illegal level.)
75 posted on 12/16/2003 8:35:38 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Is it hard on the engine?
76 posted on 12/16/2003 8:39:15 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
It's better on the engine because the higher effective octane gives fewer knocks and pings. Of course, if one lives in the mountains, you can't get the engine to knock anyway.

In terms of power, the headers were the most effective. (Mine weren't noisy.) I did put a dragstrip shifter on too (the automatic shifted much more quickly than stock), these didn't hurt either the efficiency or the longivity.
77 posted on 12/16/2003 8:45:28 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Golf carts have been using this for years
78 posted on 12/16/2003 8:50:24 PM PST by ChefKeith (NASCAR...everything else is just a game!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
......."Actually, water injection just boosts octane"......

I don't think water has octane. It does, however, cool the cylinder, which alows a leaner mixture without ping. It also adds power by the steam formed. If your car pings, (unusual today with knock sensors), You might try a cooler thermostat, say 160 deg.

79 posted on 12/16/2003 8:52:56 PM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Actually, water injection just boosts octane by scavanging the free radicals. It does work (I put one on a Corvette years ago.) It doesn't directly produce more power but it would allow a higher compression ratio which does produce more power with greater efficiency. (Unfortunately, it also raises the oxides of nitrogen to an illegal level.)

Actually the old water injection was first used on planes in WWII. Next the large diesel's used to power train's and other stationary generator's run about 850 RPM, consider that the piston's in one of these weigh's about 55lbs each. And to the other poster there never has been nor will there ever be a 100 mile to the gal carb like the old legend say's. Think air to fuel ratio and you will understand.

80 posted on 12/16/2003 8:53:13 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson