16 Oct 09
Originally posted by sonhouseThere is an awful lot of wasted energy in a vehicle right now. I'm sure many new technologies will surface to use them, just like regenerative breaking and these shocks you speak of.
One thing some MIT students developed is a way to get free energy from driving: electromagnetic shocks instead of pneumatic ones. There is a fluid that drives a small turbine hooked to a generator and they found it works better than the old shocks and produces as much as a kilowatt basically for free. There are now designs afoot eliminating the alternator and just recharging batteries, etc., by just the energy generated by the shocks!
17 Oct 09
Originally posted by forkedknightIt makes sense to capture back a proportion of energy being wasted. Putting propeller on front of the car however gets it energy solely from the increased drag it creates, thus it can never be of benefit.
There is an awful lot of wasted energy in a vehicle right now. I'm sure many new technologies will surface to use them, just like regenerative breaking and these shocks you speak of.
The alternative to capturing back energy is to avoid loosing it in the first place. The loss in shock absorbers shows that smother roads would save a significant amount of energy. Similarly improved traffic flows reduces energy lost in breaking - as well as cutting travel times.
I would like to see a gauge in the car that shows the current fuel efficiency. This would help dramatically in knowing what speed to drive at to get the best efficiency.
19 Oct 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe only problem with creating smoother roads is braking is majorly dependent on the friction of the road to the tires so you could see making a road out of a superconducting magnetic field and the car floats on the field and would have exceptional 'smoothness' but how do you stop?
It makes sense to capture back a proportion of energy being wasted. Putting propeller on front of the car however gets it energy solely from the increased drag it creates, thus it can never be of benefit.
The alternative to capturing back energy is to avoid loosing it in the first place. The loss in shock absorbers shows that smother roads would save a s ...[text shortened]... ency. This would help dramatically in knowing what speed to drive at to get the best efficiency.
In that case you have to apply magnetic energy in reverse to stop so you probably haven't gained anything.
It looks like we are stuck with roads as they are, even if very smooth when new, will degenerate in winter weather and lose the smoothness that gave it good gas mileage. We have a road here in Allentown, Pa where it is very smooth but when it rains the road turns dangerously slippery, people crash because of it all the time, the city fathers voted for the lowest bid and that is just what they got, some smooth stones of unknown type mixed with the asphalt and it is almost like ice. Get past that one mile section and the road becomes safe again.
06 Nov 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou would be correct if there was no wind and the windmill would only turn if pushed through the air by the car.
You would have a net loss. The extra drag would be greater than the extra charge. Otherwise some bright engineer would have invented a perpetual motion machine in which a windmill powers itself along in order to generate the wind to turn itself - obviously doing it in water would work even better. You put one propeller on the front which drives a turbine ...[text shortened]... e battery which drives the motor which powers the propeller on the back. Do you see the problem?
But usually the wind is blowing. If the car wasn't moving and the wind pushed the windmill on its own, a net gain would occur wouldn't you agree?
In the same sense, if you are driving at 50 km/h into a 30 km/h headwind, the windmill be turning with a combined force of 80km/h.
Would that not produce a net gain??
08 Nov 09
Originally posted by uzlessIf so, you could produce some power that way but it seems that would just be making up for a not very aerodynamic car. It would seem to me you would get more energy in effect if you put more research into cars with less drag where you wouldn't need the extra power in the first place.
You would be correct if there was no wind and the windmill would only turn if pushed through the air by the car.
But usually the wind is blowing. If the car wasn't moving and the wind pushed the windmill on its own, a net gain would occur wouldn't you agree?
In the same sense, if you are driving at 50 km/h into a 30 km/h headwind, the windmill be turning with a combined force of 80km/h.
Would that not produce a net gain??
09 Nov 09
Originally posted by sonhouseI had imaged you would put the windmill(s) inside the front grill where the air is already being directed (and causing drag) to cool the radiator.
If so, you could produce some power that way but it seems that would just be making up for a not very aerodynamic car. It would seem to me you would get more energy in effect if you put more research into cars with less drag where you wouldn't need the extra power in the first place.
How much more additional drag could there really be? I bet you could lessen the load on the alternator easily which would lessen engine load and lower your rpms for any given speed.