How to Reach 200 MPH on Hydrogen Fuel Cells 158
the_manatee writes "Ford's 999 hydrogen-powered speedster is making waves for its upcoming speed record attempt in the Bonneville Salt Flats, but details on what's actually going on under the hood have been scarce. As it turns out, there are NASCAR-style brakes, steering, and suspension components, along with 16 Ballard Mk902 fuel cells that produce 350 kW of electricity. All that juice spins up a 770-hp motor and the rest is (hopefully) history. One final ingredient: 400 lbs of ice for cooling, which will melt in seconds once the car gets up to speed."
OT: minor nitpick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Photos (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
770 hp? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda like NOT (Score:2)
No... It sounds more like a car salesman claming the car can reach 200mph when it physically cannot move faster than 70mph.
A 770hp engine cannot put out 770hp unless it has at least (really more than) 770hp (power) from some other energy source. In other words, the engine is tested and found to put out 770hp, then it is ca
Re: (Score:2)
770hp... no. (Score:2)
Stupid tech journalists strike again.
-=rsw
Gravity! Terminal velocity... (Score:2, Funny)
Get a regular hydrogen fuel cell car and drop it out of an airplane!
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather have a hydrogen fuel cell car that did 200 MPG.
Both directions, eh... (Score:3)
Car Cannon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You missed out doubling the number, since you typically have two channels (or add the peak output of all the channels together if you have more than two).
Helium, Hydrogen...hey, it's all the same. (Score:3)
From TFA:
The pressurized helium/oxygen mixture allows the fuel cells to generate more power than ambient air because of its higher oxygen content, and high-pressure storage eliminates the need for an air compressor
Nice. I expect the common press to make that kind of mistake, but you'd think that Popular Mechanics would get it right.
Frankly, I don't consider this "details". "NASCAR style brakes, suspension and steering" doesn't say much, unless they're literally identical to the NASCAR stuff Ford uses in their "Fusion."
FYI, that car is no more a "Fusion" than a NASCAR "Fusion" is; they're both entirely tube-frame chassis cars with shells that are approximately the same shape, and then overlaid with graphics to fool the eye into thinking they're shaped more like the car they're claiming it is.
There isn't a single component in the car in common with the production Ford Fusion. Hasn't been true in over a decade or more in NASCAR.
Re:Helium, Hydrogen...hey, it's all the same. (Score:4, Informative)
I think you misinterpreted the article. The oxygen cylinder contains a helium/oxygen mix. They have 2 additional cylinders to get the hydrogen from. The compressed oxygen is used so the fuel cells can absorb oxygen at a much faster rate than if they were burning regular air. Likely the fuel cells can't absorb 100% oxygen, hence they dilute the oxygen with a light inert gas like helium.
Using a dedicated helium/oxygen tank is not likely to be economical for a conventional car.
Re: (Score:2)
I have often wondered if there is a benefit in this for internal combustion engines as well. You could do away with quite a bit of plumbing around the engine and get better performance by feeding pure oxygen into the engine. Maybe it would help with low-performing biofuels.
Re: (Score:2)
I have often wondered if there is a benefit in this for internal combustion engines as well. You could do away with quite a bit of plumbing around the engine and get better performance by feeding pure oxygen into the engine. Maybe it would help with low-performing biofuels.
You could probably make it work with extensive modifications to the engine. But it's not economically viable. Compressed or liquified pure oxygen is expensive, bulky and extremely dangerous. If you want more power, it's cheaper to just ge
Re: (Score:2)
Hydrogen/Oxygen mix not so dangerous (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that's hydrogen dioxide.
or di hydrogen monoxide oxide?
duo oxidized di hydride?
oxyhydrate? (I like that one, wonder if you could bottle it and stupid people would drink it? "Oxygen and water in one bottle? Must be good... Gimmie, gimmie!")
or how's about D2O2 (or as my buddy has a small sample of: T2O2) di deuteride dioxide
-nB
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike gasoline, you mean?
It's just a question of engineering it right.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok granted not every car explodes Hollywood style in an accident, but the Ford Pinto proved that gasoline can also be pretty dangerous - as it is both volatile and highly inflammable.
I still think that you can build storage containers safe enough to withstand any collision without rupture.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless rigged by movie special effect people it's more or less impossible. Even if the tank happened to contain an explosive fuel/air mix it would need to be powerful enough to rupture the tank and mix the remaining fuel well with air.
but the Ford Pinto proved that gasoline can also be pretty dangerous - as it is both volatile and highly inflammable.
Fuel leaks in crashes are dangerous, but not explosive. As the idiot who drove his car in
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
How to Reach 200 MPH on Hydrogen Fuel Cells? (Score:2)
Strap a rocket to the back, duh!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anytime you have a duct or radiator opening, you lose downforce.
P.S. I imagine that professional engineers and race car designers know what they're doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Not if you suck air from under the car.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also worth noting that the P-51 Mustang's radiator was so cleanly designed that it actually contributed to the thrust of the airplane.
Re:Is the ice really necessary? (Score:4, Informative)
The car itself will be cooled through "ice bath cooling" because the front is sealed in order to keep the drag coefficient as low as possible
http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/11/ford-fusion-99
It's all over for H2 when... (Score:2)
get al gore's son to test drive it (Score:2, Offtopic)
We need more battery research. (Score:2)
Its a lot easier to engineer a power distribution and charging electrical system, compared to having multiple systems to handle highly explosive gas as well as an electrical system. Its also a lot easier to generate electricity, pipe it into a charging system, compared to the energy used to split water into H2 and O2.
I used to
FORD = Fscked On Race Day (Score:3, Informative)
In this case by the 300 mph hydrogen fuel cell Buckeye Bullet.
http://jalopnik.com/cars/alternative-energy/300%2
Re: (Score:2)
This article will give you some more context:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/07/10/fords-hydr ogen-999-racer-shooting-for-fuel-cell-land-speed-r eco/ [autobloggreen.com]
Re: (Score:2)
but my username is probably shorter than yours
The effect of water vapor exhaust? (Score:3, Interesting)
The exhaust of a hydrogen car is mostly warm water vapor - the same output as a humidifier.
If the whole planet switched to hydrogen, what would be the overall effect of running a billion humidifiers on our roads? Would Arizona suddenly become as humid as Florida?
Re: (Score:2)
Not if we can actually get some laws to take away their drivers licenses. But seeing as they're the majority of people who actually go out and vote, that's not likely to happen any time soon....
Re:The effect of water vapor exhaust? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, water vapor.
Has Arizona turned to a jungle yet?
Re: (Score:2)
Wet roads.
Not the remotest chance.
Urban areas have long faced higher levels of humidity than is natural, thanks to human use of water. However, even with all the people with all the sprinklers spraying all the water, on all the lawns... it only raises the humidity a very small amount. A few million fuel cell vehicles couldn't hope to com
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's such a small fraction that it's what I would refer to as "a pee in the Nile". Let's take Arizona as an example... it has about 6 million people and uses around 2.4 trillion gallons (yes 2400 billion) per year [1] with
On-line results available soon (Score:2)
Can't beat the Buckeye Bullet 2 (Score:2, Insightful)
http://buckeyebullet.com/vehicle.htm [buckeyebullet.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Damned cool, though.
After 40 years of reasearch... (Score:2, Informative)
Yep, somewhen in the middle 60's Ford made a experimental Econoline van that was powered by fuel cells.
Need some sleep? Try
Ford's 999 (Score:2)
shower power (Score:2)
Hells bells, I got the same answer again:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=4.184+joules+% 2F+gram+*+3+gallons+%2F+minute+*+1+kg%2Fliter+*+40 &btnG=Search&m [google.ca]
Power/Weight Density (Score:4, Informative)
An AC induction motor has the highest power/weight density of all electric motors. Brushless DC motors are only competitive for very small motors. Even so, they could probably get a better power/weight number by burning the hydrogen in a modified internal combustion engine or in a jet engine.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
AC motors can be used as incredibly effective non regenerative breaks if DC is applied to the field.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Reading through more sites, AC motors are more efficient, last longer, and emit less pollution. Apparently brushes wear out and can spark, leading to ozone creation.
Re:Power/Weight Density (Score:4, Informative)
As to the regen braking issue, DC motors are optomised towards the production of kinetic energy at an expense of not so good generation capability. In fact, some DC motors can not be generators as part of the DC is used to energize a coil as a reaction magnet (rather than having ultra high cost rare earth magnets), to use them as generators would require energizing that coil(s) and since the circuit is integral to the motor that is not possible.
-nB
Re: (Score:2)
HTF is that a troll?
Re: (Score:2)
Explains a lot as to why they're using AC motors, even if they do have to spend a couple percentage points of energy to run the DC from the batteries through an inverter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thinking about it, an EV motor being used as a generator isn't going to be producing the same voltage as what's used to drive it. So in order to draw energy from the motor(slowing the car down), you'd have to step the voltage up above that of the battery pack in order to charge it.
One thing I remember is that changing voltage is easier with AC than DC. Most of the time to change the voltage of DC you change it into AC first anyways.
So while the controller is more complicated
Re: (Score:2)
Not really but I could have used a better choice of words. Both AC and DC motor controllers are very closely related to switching power supplies. They chop up the incoming power to produce AC and execute an impedance transformation (just like a transformer) using switching and reactive elements to control the output power. The additional complexity for an AC motor comes about because you essentially have to do this three times in parallel to drive the 3 phases and the math
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
AC motors do have pow
Re: (Score:2)
"Brushless DC" vs "synchronous AC" motors. (Score:5, Informative)
An AC induction motor has the highest power/weight density of all electric motors. Brushless DC motors are only competitive for very small motors.
Er, no. A "brushless DC" and a "variable-frequency synchronous AC" motor are the same thing. Smaller motors tend to be called "brushless DC" and are driven by "motor controllers", while larger motors are called "variable-frequency AC" and are driven by "drives" or "inverters". The threshold is around 1KW. The difference in terminology comes from different industries.
All motors are AC at the windings, or they'd reach a steady state position and stop. "Commutation" refers to the means provided to switch power to the windings so the motor continues to chase the minimum position for the magnetic field. Commutation can be performed with brushes and a commutator (which is just a drum of contacts), with external electronics, or simply borrowed from the power line frequency. "Brushless DC" and "variable AC" motors are driven by external electronics. They're usually at least 3 phase devices; this allows starting from a stationary position without the possibility of being stuck at a neutral point.
This concept scales up just fine. Here's the General Electric AC6000 [railfan.net], the most powerful locomotive in the world, driven by 3-phase AC variable-frequency motors. The software, written in C++, locks all the wheels together as if they were geared together, even though there's a separate motor for each axle. This allows more tractive effort without wheel slip than any previous locomotive. There are thousands of these locomotives (mostly the smaller AC4400, but a few hundred of the big AC6000) in use today.
Re:"Brushless DC" vs "synchronous AC" motors. (Score:5, Interesting)
For this application, they will be using an induction AC motor. This is not a synchronous AC motor. Induction motors eliminate the permanent magnets of Brushless DC motors and the rotating electromagnets of synchronous motors. Replacing the rotating magnets with a "squirrel cage" results in a small net weight savings, and a considerable inertia reduction.
In all likelihood the locomotives that you are talking about are also using induction motors. At locomotive power levels, induction motors allow for some nice tricks that blur the line between a conventional induction motor and a conventional synchronous motor. Specifically, if you have a separate power source / load for the inductive rotor, the resulting motor design looks like a synchronous motor, but is really a specialized induction motor. GE even has patents on this technology.
The power research group at my local university even did a research contract with a major multinational on how to exploit induction motor properties for use in new electric car designs. For weight sensitive applications (like a car) over 1 kW, almost all the motors are induction. Even for high-accuracy applications with servo capability, like CNC machines, all the large spindle motors are induction motors. With modern control electronics, an induction motor is all you need.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The point of maximum traction is actually the point when the wheels are just starting to slip. That's why the Class 66 (UK), amongst many others round the world, has traction control systems that at the lowest speeds allows the wheels to slip a quarter turn per revolution.
Seems counterintuitive, but it means one single locomotive can accelerate a train from rest - the difficult bit; once you're started it's easy to keep going - that without that technology would have been challenging for two or th
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the General Electric AC6000, the most powerful locomotive in the world
Perhaps the most powerful diesel-electric locomotive (?), but there are electric locomotives much more powerful than that. At about 4400 KW, the AC6000 is outclassed by e.g. this Italian one at 6000 KW [wikipedia.org], not to mention the IORE [ewetel.net] at 2x5400 KW, although I guess that one can be debated since it seems to be a two-part locomotive(?).
Also high-speed trains have pretty powerful locomotives, e.g. Eurostar [wikipedia.org] has two locomotives providing a tot
Re:AC? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:AC? (BRUSHLESS) (Score:2)
Re:AC? - because they are idiots... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ethanol is the new craze but producin
Re:AC? (Score:5, Interesting)
Installing a motor in every wheel is intuitively a nice idea. Unfortunately, electric motors have a great deal of inertia. At high speeds, the effects of this rotational inertia dramatically affect the stability of the vehicle when it hits a bump.
At lower speeds, vehicle performance is maximized when the motors torque/speed curve is matched to the maximum speed of the vehicle while simultaneously matching motor diameter to wheel diameter. Unfortunately, the wheel diameter, tire diameter, motor diameter, and peak motor RPM rarely agree. Thus mechanical gearing often helps.
Re: (Score:2)
At high speeds, the effects of this rotational inertia dramatically affect the stability of the vehicle when it hits a bump.
No, thats the unsprung mass problem. It is caused by linear momentum up and down when the wheel has to negotiate a non-flat surface.
Wheel mass is a problem, but we haven't yet seen much development in integrated motor-wheel assemblies. It will be interesting to see what happens once some smart Japanese engineers have had a go at optimising it.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, don't some modern cars already have motors connected to the wheels in order to provide regenerative breaking?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think some sports cars have brake disks mounted this way, to reduce the inertia of the wheels.
Re: (Score:2)
Since I reme
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Anyway, don't some modern cars already have motors connected to the wheels in order to provide regenerative breaking?
Unless you happen to own a jet-car like this guy [youtube.com] or a bike like this guy [youtube.com], generally the motor is connected to the wheels....
sorry.. just had to :P
tm
Re:AC? (Score:4, Interesting)
This was the subject of a few papers and subsequent articles in popular automotive and popular mechanics type magazines.
The conclusion was that technology would be needed to offset these effects and even at the time of the articles/papers 20years ago, it was not too farfetched.
With today's high response computers already in cars with active suspension, linear traction, etc. the computer technology to offset these problems is something that can easily be tuned using today's technology.
Some aspects of independent motors, or 'drive trains' to each wheel is 'enhanced' stability and traction control, as well as rotational tricks that would allow the car to rotate one wheel backwards while rotating the others forward. This would give a performance car incredible cornering, handling, as well as make available some interesting turning radius effects.
I can remember back when 'performance' car people hated the idea of 'alternative' energy or electric powered cars and saw them as the death of the sports/muscle cars. At the time I spoke up and tried to explain how wrong they were, as alternative technology could yield faster, better performing and safer sports cars. This is just one area and example of how new technology would achieve these results.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here's an interesting
Re: (Score:2)
IE it's better to have 1 300 pound 95% efficient motor and some connecting equipment than two 200 pound 90% efficient motors at the wheels.
Re: (Score:2)
According to an article [popularmechanics.com] published at Popular Mechanics last summer, the cost to make hydrogen is $3 per kg on a GE's 10' x 20' machine. It looks pretty easy indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hear it is not.
Re: (Score:2)
They took 3k miles as a base-line f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily, hydrogen is easy to produce. You just suck in atmospheric air, distill the contents and, voila! H2.
Let's check Wikipedia. What's the atmosphere made out of?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_atmosphere [wikipedia.org]
Oh, nitrogen, oxygen, argon, carbon dioxide, water vapor... and 0.002% "other". Even if almost all of "other" was H2, that's a ridiculously small yield. And every other gas will liquefy at a higher temperature than the H2, so you will have to
Re: (Score:2)
Hydrogen is only being pushed because if we go to hydrogen, the companies that own the infrastructure of refining and transporting fuels get to stay in business. If we eventually go to batter
Re: (Score:2)
Nice conspiracy-sounding words, but there are real engineering reasons. The existing North American pipeline network cannot handle hydrogen. A liquid hydrogen road tanker costs over a million dollars because of the materials needed and the complexity. GH2 tube trailers are not quite so expensive, but then you are dealing with the concept of very
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not just wishing, I'm personally doing more to cut energy consumption and CO2 emission than almost anyone else I know, but I wish the government wouldn't push the most hype and dollars towards one of the less promising technologies.
Thankfully there's at least a LITTLE sense creeping back in; they're at least TALKING about building new nuke plants again. I'll believe it when I see it though; the same
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I could speculate that the fuel cell power output degrades at high temperatures so when doing a standing start you have with zero cooling and lose performance until cooling becomes effective. IC engines may perform better as temperature rises.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.aspecpro.com/ [aspecpro.com]
Re: (Score:2)
My motorcyle will do 0 to 200 to 0 in under 2 miles and has a power to weight ratio of 3 pounds per HP, including rider. I have quality parts on it, but the brakes and suspension certainly aren't NASCAR grade. NASCAR grade stuff can take a relentless pounding for hours on end and that simply isn't releven