« Currie Technologies to Introduce Range of Hybrid-Electric Bikes and Electric Scooters | Main | Goodyear Launches Fuel-Efficient Truck Tire Lines »
PML’s In-Wheel Motor, Plug-in Series Hybrid MINI
25 August 2006
 |
| The MINI QED. |
PML Flightlink and its partner Synergy Innovations recently unveiled an in-wheel, plug-in series hybrid conversion of a MINI at the British Motor Show, the MINI QED. The car, one of two the partners have so far produced, serves as a testbed and demonstrator for technologies the company—which designs and manufactures electric motors, joysticks and drive systems—hopes to commercialize.
The QED currently uses four 750 Nm brushless permanent motors in its wheels, a 21 kWh lithium-polymer battery pack and a 250cc two-cylinder, four-stroke engine as the genset. The QED supports an all-electric range of 200-250 miles and has a total range of about 932 miles (1,500 km). The car accelerates from 0-62 mph in less than 5 seconds.
The QED uses a 350V, 11 Farad ultracapacitor to discharge the high current for acceleration and to accept the regen power back from braking. This protects the batteries from high current spikes.
PML is working on the engine component and may change it in the near future. Emission testing is part of that process.
The driver can specify an all-electric Eco mode in which the engine will not start unless directed by the operator. In the normal operating mode, the engine starts when the battery drops to a 50% state of charge (SOC). A third mode—sport—offers an enhanced performance profile on top of the normal mode.
Anti-skid and traction control capabilities are built into each wheel. The anti-skid function dynamically monitors each wheel to detect the onset of skid onset, and then manages the system to obtain maximum non-skid torque from the wheel in either acceleration or braking modes. Traction control dynamically distributes torque when any wheel is in skid management mode.
An option provides steering wheel feed-forward input to the traction control system, allowing driver in tent and wheel alignment to influence stability and traction. Another option would provide further stability input through attitude, yaw and gyroscopic sensors.
PML FlightLink has also developed a prototype electric scooter—the PRAZE project—with European partners including Peugeot and with support from the European Commission.
August 25, 2006 in Hybrids, Plug-ins | Permalink | Comments (77) | TrackBack (2)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22062/5789749
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference PML’s In-Wheel Motor, Plug-in Series Hybrid MINI :
» PML’s In-Wheel Motor, Plug-in Series Hybrid MINI 80mpg from
PML Flightlink and its partner Synergy Innovations recently unveiled an in-wheel, plug-in series hybrid conversion of a MINI at the British Motor Show, the MINI QED. The car, one of two the partners have so far produced, serves as a testbed and demonst... [Read More]
Tracked on Aug 25, 2006 11:19:29 AM
» Featured on BuzzTracker from BuzzTracker.com
[Read More]
Tracked on Aug 27, 2006 4:11:57 PM
Comments
Very nice! I'd hate to see the price tag though.
The beauty of in-wheel motors: Ultimate control of the driving wheels...traction control, ABS, stability, yaw, every dynamic can be programmed in and with a sufficiently powerful DSP employing a well thought out PID algorithm you can do all the sensing on the motor itself without external wheel speed sensors and the like.
Now if only I could buy a conversion kit to give myself AWD with rear-wheel in wheel motors and small battery pack (1-2kwh). My car is almost 400lbs lighter than the average mini.
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 25, 2006 9:14:51 AM
I wonder if this would work in retrofits to make all cars hybrids? Does anyone know?
Posted by: Richard | Aug 25, 2006 9:24:08 AM
This is getting close to what I have been trying to give away for several years.
Note: With 3000 NM of thrust, not another car in the world can equal it. Just be careful what you do leaving stopplights.
It could flip over backwards!
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 25, 2006 9:56:17 AM
From PML's website:
Learn all about our new 4-wheel drive electric hybrid Super Mini (Min.e) as seen at this years International Motor Show London.
0-60mph in 4.5 seconds!
Top speed 150mph!!
80mpg!!!
Using PML 'In wheel' motors, drives and power control electronics. New driver touch screen interface, 3 driving modes; Eco, Normal, Sport, Power boost function in Sport mode.
A big step towards the future of Hybrid technology!
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 25, 2006 10:01:18 AM
Richard, this (as a retrofit) would be best suited to make a car electric as a standard vehicle with the electrical components would be overpowered (make for a good drag racing vehicle though I'm sure!). A two motor version may work well if you bought a car with the low-end engine. (e.g. A 4-cyl mid-size sedan may be a reasonable retrofit candidate but if you opted for the V-6 it doesn't make as much sense unless you are building a drag car...too much power, less fuel economy gain due to weight).
Then again if your intention is to completely replace the entire drivetrain of your current vehicle with the entire drivetrain proposed here that is a different matter altogether. Even if you do the labor yourself the components (batteries) are likely to be nearly as costly as a new car. I'd do it if I could despite the cost.
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 25, 2006 10:07:20 AM
Wow!! Sounds too good to be real. No mention of price.
Posted by: Dursun | Aug 25, 2006 10:28:29 AM
About the torque:
Remember most vehicles have gearing (for example my car is roughly 13:1 in first gear due to a ~3.5 1st and 3.72 final) to multiply torque...of course that torque is not available at close to 0rpms as an electric vehicle but this has no gearing due to it using in wheel motors. Then again with so much torque available from 0rpm you don't need nearly as much multiplication to move a vehicle (in the case of my vehicle peak torque is at 4500rpm with 85% torque only available once ~2500rpm is reached requiring significant multiplication to get it moving from idle at a dead stop).
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 25, 2006 10:54:40 AM
With an electric range over 200 miles, and a 21 kwhr battery it's using less than 100 watt-hours per mile. Sound almost too good to be true....
Posted by: Nick | Aug 25, 2006 11:41:27 AM
This is what I'm talking about! I can hardly wait to see this product take off. Ideas like this have been around for years, but now tech is making it more viable. I hope something like this will make it mainstream. Lucas, if your name is all over this, how come nobody's heard of it yet? Other people have had these ideas for years, too. Hard to say who's first.
They're mixing ultra-caps in with the battery system: Excellent! All I see on their website is talk of DC motors. No AC I guess. Too bad, cause I would love to see this thing perform with Raser's induction technology added.
They use a 250cc four stroke twin as the genset engine. Wonder if it is something like the engine in the Kawasaki ninja 250: that bike can get 70 miles to the gallon with some people driving. Hayes Diversified Technologies are the guys building/converting the U.S. Military's new diesel motorcycles! They are Kawi KLR650's with a purpose designed 611cc normally aspirated, single cylinder diesel engine. That bike (the still to be released civilian version) gets 102 miles/gallon at rougly 55 miles per hour, so they say. (I believe it.) That would be a much better engine even: more torque/power and better mileage with built in fuel-flexibility. The steady revs needed with the generator would make it even better. Then of course there are the Rand Cam type engines coming out soon...this has a bright future indeed. *If* they can get the price to a semi-reasonable state...
Posted by: John W. | Aug 25, 2006 11:41:47 AM
In-wheel is some cool stuff, however, will suffer from a durability standpoint. The wheel compartment overwhelmingly takes the most abuse from water, dirt, debri and the continual bouncing. The jolt of a couple of good potholes at 30mph is enough to scramble the brains of most electrical components. ABS has been in cars for 2 decades and most systems have 'glitches' from time to time. 'Glitches' is not a word I want associated with my drive train.
Posted by: Joseph | Aug 25, 2006 12:05:17 PM
Good news. By combining most of the newest technologies into the same vehicle, the results seems to be outstandings.
Why couln't the major car manufacturers do the same or more? I fail to understand why people like GM, Ford etc with huge R & D resources don't come up with better ideas. Puting huge diesel engines into 4-ton pick-up trucks is not very inovative. Why are all their engineers doing....
Where is Mitsubishi with their own in-wheel electric car?
Posted by: Harvey D. | Aug 25, 2006 12:13:44 PM
I don't want money or fame. I just want somebody with the means to build these things to build them.
I'm an old man. I sure would like to see something I thought of thirty years ago come to fruitation before I'm gone.
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 25, 2006 12:22:25 PM
This Mini is amazing! The designers did pretty much what I was hoping they'd do to electrify my favorite vehicle right down to the ultracaps. I would trade in my current Mini immediately if they became available.
Posted by: Mark Martino | Aug 25, 2006 12:33:31 PM
We've had fantastic prototypes for years. What are the chances that a car company is actually going to put one into production? I am extremely pessimistic.
Posted by: marcus | Aug 25, 2006 12:58:35 PM
Joseph- Not sure about the mini concept car but their website indicates the in-wheel motors are IP65 rated. Basically impervious to dirt, dust & mud penetration and will resist pressurized water jets from any angle. If they go for IP66 rating then it will even be submersible for 30 minutes in 1 meter of water. They could probably Mil-spec (mil std810) it for vibration endurance...but I too wonder about the long term viability. Perhaps they require a minimum tire sidewall dimension when their motors are in use.
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 25, 2006 1:00:06 PM
Lucas, If you have some great innovative idea and nothing better to do with your time (you make it sound as if you are old enough to be retired) rather than sitting around wishing for someone to develop your idea why don't you just go to www.grants.gov and find a grant that your idea will fit into. If you have the technical knowledge and capabilities requried to develop your idea it should not take too much to write the Proposal, obtain the grant money, develop the idea and publish it. If you put it out there before anyone can submit a patent application then you can make it freely available to anyone without anyone ever being able to buy the patent and restrict the use of your "technology". This way all you invest is your time.
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 25, 2006 1:40:57 PM
Thanks for the thought Patrick.
I've got a full and happy life without messing with the "government".
You might be amazed at the things I've "invented" years before they came on the scene. A few experiances of trying to explain a totally new concept to a pack of "engineers" will cause you to run the other way.
They have no problem explaining why it won't work. They never seem to be surprised when it does.
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 25, 2006 1:52:03 PM
Lucas: have you ever tried inventing a sense of humility?
Posted by: Tim H. | Aug 25, 2006 3:34:41 PM
100 watt hours per mile...Is that correct?
Posted by: cs1992 | Aug 25, 2006 4:08:34 PM
No.
If you don't toot your own horn, who will?
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 25, 2006 4:21:58 PM
Is this still a 4 seater or is it down to 2 seats ?
How much space does all this take up ?
Is there any space left in the boot (trunk) ?
If there is room for 4 and luggage, they may have something, else they need a bigger car for the bag of tricks - say a BMW 3 series.
It might go well with the 320D which we are lucky enough to have in europe.
Posted by: mahonj | Aug 25, 2006 5:12:14 PM
"21 kWh lithium-polymer battery pack ... an all-electric range of 200-250 miles."
That is 76MJ/320Km or 24MJ/100Km. Which is half the best figures (which were lab figures) out of the DoE electric car project.
2002-01-1916, Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Testing by James E. Francfort and Lee A. Slezak. [PDF]
The actual use figures out of that project were about twice the lab numbers.
Furthermore a 21KWh (76MJ) battery is going to be pretty heavy. Currently available Li-ion batteries run .72MJ/kg tops. So that is 100Kg in batteries alone.
Finally, I am not an automotive engineer, but I have always understood that unsprung weight, like in-wheel motors, was detrimental to good handling. I think the in wheel motor approach is used in some heavy equipment, but that is usually off-road.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz | Aug 25, 2006 9:35:04 PM
Hi Robert, 100 kg's for the battery alone is not all that bad. Consider the weight of a normal gas engine with the transmission together, both of which will be missing on this vehicle (not counting the genset, of course). It's very doable. I'd live with it for a genset powered EV!
Posted by: John W. | Aug 25, 2006 9:56:04 PM
Mini 1.6L DOHC engine and tranny (manual) is likely to weigh around 400lbs together and add another 140lbs for the stock gas tank (full).
Unsprung weight on the wheels is detrimental to handling but then again the fine control over the individual wheel speeds will make up for that.
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 26, 2006 8:54:46 AM
I am working on a project in Pakistan to develop an electric auto-rickshaw (3-wheel taxi) and we have been doing a lot of mixing and matching to get a product on the road which is not so much a technological marvel but something actually commercially viable.
I must say that the 0,1KWh per mile claim may only be true downhill and 21KWh battery pack seems more 250Kgs terriory.
Posted by: Hasan | Aug 26, 2006 9:27:06 AM
The jolt of a couple of good potholes at 30mph is enough to scramble the brains of most electrical components.Hogwash. Tire pressure transmitters live in the wheels, and electronics have been built into artillery shells. If the system is mechanically sound, the electrons follow right along.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | Aug 26, 2006 11:25:04 AM
before getting too excited, does anyone want to guess how much 21kWhs of li-poly batteries cost?
the EDrive pack is 9kWh for $12,000. so, you can get the battery pack for your hot mini for about the price of a 350Z. add in the rest of the electronics, motors, and the donor car and you'll likely find yourself in ferrari territory.
if fast cars aren't your thing, you could buy a normal mini and finance the planting of a small forest.
Posted by: shaun mann | Aug 26, 2006 11:29:35 PM
Like everything else prices come down when efficiency of manufacturing goes up. Economy of scale.
Posted by: Jim | Aug 27, 2006 1:19:34 AM
Like everything else prices come down when efficiency of manufacturing goes up. Economy of scale.
Seen the price of solar panels lately? Housing?
Production efficiency cost reductions can often be overwhelmed by raw material, labor, and other cost increases.
Posted by: m | Aug 27, 2006 9:55:39 AM
Lucas:
I understand you very much. Personally I was proposing performance hybrids as entry point for HEV technology years before appearance of Prius.
Posted by: Andrey | Aug 28, 2006 1:23:56 AM
Question.
Is it possible to simply buy the wheels and the batteries/capacitors and a controller and build my own vehicle??? If so, who and where do I make contact?
Posted by: Zumbro | Aug 28, 2006 9:51:29 AM
Regarding Economy of Scale (Jim 8/27 - 1:19)
Seen the price of laptops?
Seen the price of Plasma HDTV?
PV is a function of poly-silicon, housing is a function of demand, not supply. Manufactured housing is relatively inexpensive, you can buy a couple tomorrow. A 10,000 square foot house on a private golf course is not an example of economy of scale simply because there are lots of square feet.
Posted by: Mike Carpenter | Aug 28, 2006 1:08:03 PM
Mike,
Good points. Hopefully this will not be the case. We will see happens.
Ciao
Posted by: JIm | Aug 28, 2006 2:32:56 PM
Please keep me posted on your progress.
I am involved with auto/motive power marketing on two Continents and would be very much interested to 'scare'these into the field.
When will they be technically ready and cost afordable.?
Best Regards, Attila
Posted by: Attila Hun | Aug 29, 2006 7:37:50 AM
This is what I've been waiting for.
But it's actually overkill. Better offer it with 1/3 the electric range and battery capacity. That's enough for 90% of journeys.
Posted by: Alexander Terrell | Aug 29, 2006 12:25:16 PM
The issue is these guys have done it! Nevermind that 90% if the technology was available in 1987 (when Volvo built their turbo-alternator version of the 850) the fact is that fossil fuels are becoming a political football in world politics, hence the price rise for petrol. Having a multi-fuel capable genset would enhance this design greatly, but what they've already done is a bold step! As for the unsprung weight issue of the wheel motors, if you look at the trade off of the weight of the motor using an alloy wheel vs. the old stamped&welded steel wheels, it's almost a wash. I'd like to see one of these with a Capstone Micro gas turbine in it instead of the 2 cyl/4 stroke piston engine - then when petrol becomes too expensive I can use propane, butane, acetylene, kerosene, diesel, cellulosic alcohol, etcetra. It's almost perfect as is - but imagine a version with that turbine?
Posted by: Erik Karl Sorgatz | Aug 29, 2006 12:54:51 PM
Only front wheel drive, supercapacitor and small atkinson diesel genset will be more affordable ? With lower performance, but commuters dont need drag cars !
Posted by: Philippe | Aug 29, 2006 5:10:33 PM
Pick those nits, nitwits. Where's your designs? What a bunch of dweebs.
I've been touting electric cars with generators for years. But the best generator is a solid oxide fuel cell/microturbine. The new CeO2/copper SOFC solves the sulfur and contamination problems to run on any liquid fuel. With the microturbine it gets 75% efficiency, 5 times that of this internal combustion generator, for 400 mpg in this car.
Posted by: amazingdrx | Aug 29, 2006 6:39:02 PM
The new ceria copper SOFC is impressive. They can reform several different fuels right in the stack and are more efficient than previous SOFCs. Right now they are using them for APUs, but with Vehicle to Grid projects, they might make a 10kwh unit to continuously charge a lithium battery bank in the car or connect to the grid and get some real efficiency.
http://www.franklinfuelcells.com/
Posted by: SJC | Aug 30, 2006 8:48:53 PM
Great car, very curious about their in-wheel motor design. In fact, this mini is over-dimensioned with respect to its power and maximum speed, but it demonstrates the potential of this technology. Smaller and lighter motor wheels will be sufficient for most people. Secondly, it might be possible to use a small li-ion battery (or even just ultra-capacitors) to store electric energy very temporarily that comes from the generator (a high capacity battery is not necessary). Such adaptations reduce the weight of this mini substantially, which results into a higher number of miles/gallon. And it will be a much cheaper, saver and more comfortable car.
Hopefully it will be mass produced soon.
Posted by: Koen van Vlaenderen | Aug 31, 2006 10:46:16 AM
"Seen the price of solar panels lately? Housing?"
Both of these are high because of price rationing, not cost. The COST of polysilicon is stable, but the prices have jumped because manufacturers can't expand as quickly as demand has risen.
Housing is very cheap in the exurbs, where there is no shortage of space...
Posted by: Nick | Aug 31, 2006 3:02:58 PM
Great car! But I agree with Alexander that this is overkill. With an all EV range similar to the Tesla, who needs the generator (or as Alexander states reduce the size of the battery). I assume they are starting with the ultimate and will compromise later.
Posted by: Neil | Sep 1, 2006 8:32:13 AM
forget my last remark, after re-reading the article it is obvious that this is not meant as a production car, just a demonstration platform for the various technologies ... so why not go whole hog.
Posted by: Neil | Sep 1, 2006 10:30:00 AM
If unsprung weight of the motor in the wheels is an issue, couldn't a plug-in motor be mounted in the drive shaft before the differential?
Posted by: Greg | Sep 1, 2006 12:50:26 PM
Driveshaft? Differential? No such thing when you use in wheel motors. Adding such things robs the efficiency of the system and provides mechanical components requiring more maintenance.
If you are not racing (SCCA, Rally, etc) and a lightweight wheel & tire is used the unsprung weight should not be too much of a factor for daily performance. The lower center of gravity (no large motor in the engine bay and the motors at the corners as low as the centerline of the wheels) should make up for it for normal handling manuevers. The dampers and springs will probably have to be beefier though so that potholes don't cause the wheel to lose too much contact with the ground (maybe not beefier, but provide better overall control).
Posted by: Patrick | Sep 1, 2006 1:37:20 PM
A real life road-test of this car will be very interesting. The concept of in-wheel is so natural compared to current solution (motor+transmition). EM brakes, EM ABS, everything on continuous control, and much lower mechanical parts.
I quite don't understand: the classic 250cc motor is used only for recharging batteries. They said that the vehicle has 932miles range; but at what speed? I suspect specifications about range are too optimistic.
The concept of using a clasic engine at constant load as a generator is very good (low emissions, high efficiency) but I think at high speed battery drains can't be compensated by generator.
About price: I find a webpage where estimated price for prototype was 200k pounds. I think it's not too much if the specifications are true.
Posted by: mircea | Sep 2, 2006 9:28:48 AM
So, if in-wheel electric motors will increase useful interior room, how is this extra room to be utilized? Will these cars make trips to Mexico and return able to stash even more ingestable contraband by which these engineers may accellerate their genius and come up with more futurama-istic ideas? Yeah, that's probably it.
It's not like we don't have too many cars or depend upon them too much.
Wait! I know! Engineer the human species to become aemebic blobs, and build flying, egg-shaped individual mobility devices that we will live in 24-7! Yeah! That's it! Eureka!
Posted by: Wells | Sep 5, 2006 10:42:37 AM
Thej big question here is will the Wheel Motor be commercially available and when? The possibility of bolting on PHEV functionality say using two wheel motors on the rear of a reasonably sized front wheel drive vehicle like um.... a Corolla is encouraging. Just wish someone would market the wheels.
And, BTW, I looked on grants.gov and to no surprise there weren't any grants I could find related to Electric Vehicle technology development at all - just fuel cells. If any does find one I'm sure some of us would be interested.
Posted by: Mike | Sep 8, 2006 10:23:33 AM
Hmmm, if you are familiar with GSA/GOV communications try sending a proposal for a RFP concerning electric vehicle grants. Perhaps certain aspects of fuel cell grants could be capitalized upon to develop electric vehicles (improving the efficiency of a fuel cell vehicle can imply improving the electrical portion only and leaving the fuel cell stack and fuel storage to someone else).
I wonder how the "electra-cycle" guys are doing with their project. It uses something similar to an in-wheel motor and claims a 200mpg fuel economy with use of a very small gasoline engine and electric motor combo. I contacted them a year ago but they didn't like the application I wanted to develop and declined to sell me a motor and controller.
Posted by: Patrick | Sep 8, 2006 11:20:41 AM
No mention anywhere of the life of the motors in the wheel. What is the expected MTBF of these things?
I would have believed that if you were going to put motors in tires you'd want to make the tyres fatter to decrease shock to motor assembly. I'm a bigger fan of the wheel motors being moved to the wheel arches and shielded from dust and shock, while the wheels are connected via a CV assembly. This would also decrease the unsprung mass in the wheels making handling better.
With regards to the 250 cc engine, it is silly to assume future engine blocks will be made of the same stuff we now use. A 250cc motorbike engine reving at 10000rpm can give you 45 hp, which is fine for recharging batts considering that most cars don't even use that much for everyday commuting anyway. But such an engine could not maintain this rate of revolution for more then a short period of time before cooking. Maybe future engines will be ceramic or some other alloy that can dissipate heat quicker. More shielding too, so it is quieter.
Posted by: Adrian | Sep 13, 2006 7:05:00 AM
A cv assembly adds complexity and transmission losses.
Electric engines can be made very resilient, so the shocks will not be a problem at all. If you drop your electric drill, it will survive the shock without any problem 99.9% of the time. Dirt and water is a question of good seals, which are already available today.
The only disadvantage of inwheel motors is the unsprung weight, but I am sure this will prove theoretical. Lightweight materials and active suspension will take care of it.
Posted by: anne | Sep 14, 2006 7:57:38 AM
Be part of history and don't miss the birth of a new motorsport. The Indian AutoRickshaw Challenge is a 1000km (590miles) rally through the most scenic roads of South India in a three wheel motorized vehicle. The race is open to everyone regardless of experience or age. Rickshaws will be provided by the organizers.
Posted by: salessupport86 | Sep 14, 2006 9:36:47 PM
To all of you . Everybody is asking who killed the electric vehicle?.Well the question should be "WHY" not
"WHO" instead.
If GM would continue building and selling EV1's after a relatively short period of time what would have happen to all the gas stations ifrastructure , all dealers service incomes, all billion of dollars petro profits and so on you can go on and on and find at least a few dozen of more reasons WHY private and goverment agencies are NOT interested in promoting electric cars.(could it collapse the economy?what to do with manufacturing support sectors(parts oil air filters,service and so on}what about manpower involved in autoindustry?????? JUst think about it.
By now has been proven that electric car is reality
and is working.NOT to many people needs Tesla's or 640 HP Mini's going 150 mph but many would go for reasonable fraction of it in price and performance.
The oil reserve is declining
the gas prices is increasing
This is like 2+2=4 not 5
Not to mention climate changes
PS.looking for investor into hybrid/electric endevour
Interested ? send e-mail amroz@cogeco.ca
Thank you for reading
Posted by: andrew mroz | Sep 16, 2006 9:12:26 AM
WE HAVE A WINNER!
LET'S DO IT!!!!!!
Posted by: Bill | Dec 1, 2006 8:50:03 PM
How do I get one? and how much are they?
what you or we need to do is set up shop and start converting cars. get a factory over seas to start mass producing the components needed to convert cars. when you have large volumes being converted then set up shop in a number of staites across the US and canada and so on. You could take over the Automotive world and when they see you doing it they will ither try and kill you stomp you out some how or do it themselves. And Just remember the truth will will Supresive people who live lies will only succed aslong as the can supress the truth. and sinking truth is like keeping tones of compressed air at the bottom of the sea it will just keep rising to the surface over and over again.
so please how can I get one what do we need to do to set up shop converting cars.
Matthew Baldwin.
Posted by: Matthew Baldwin | Dec 6, 2006 11:25:51 AM
Just a thought, I've run across a website and videos in which a man regularly converts smaller engines (generators, etc.) to run off of compressed hydrogen. It seems that, if this technology is indeed viable, this would be a good application. Given that the generator's fuel demands are drastically lower than that of a combustion engine, it seems that the problem of storing enough hydrogen for effective range would not be as great of a problem. Then we would have a completely eco-friendly vehicle that still had sufficient power and range. Also, I'm sure that if the production of these models went mainstream, costs would drop and the technical details would be panned out. It obviously costs less than current fuel cell vehicles and is probably more feasibly producible. All we would need is the hydrogen infrastructure (fueling stations, etc.). And it could be a good crossover until fuel cells are perfected, and they can then provide the electrical power needed.
Posted by: Finn Cox | Dec 13, 2006 10:19:48 PM
Instead of a 200mile electric and 800mile fuel-generated electric MINI, I hope someone translates this to a 100mile electric and 400 mile fuel-generated electric SALOON car. I have to refill after 350 to 400 miles in my petrol mondeo anyway so itd be worth the extra investment to be able to travel 40 miles a day for 360 days out of the year using home charging (ie zero petrol reqd for 99% of my driving :D) with cheaper long-range trips assisted by petrol-generated electricity once in a blue moon when I drive from Leeds to Scotland or London. The middle east will lose their oil finance for militant islam and western governments lose their tax on freedom of movement (until they slap a charge on mileage or electricity - both of which they will probably do). Then all we need is home-generation to be "energy-positive" using various technologies and everyone will be happy except except big brother.
Posted by: Zippy | Jan 15, 2007 10:26:51 AM
As for the unsprung weight of the motor in the wheels, remember there is no brakes and driveshaft, so you reduce some weight there.
Posted by: McSkipper | Feb 21, 2007 1:38:30 PM
mk skipper good point im no engeneer but i do work on cars and know that disks and calipers weigh a lot
Posted by: hassan | Mar 10, 2007 11:39:52 PM
What I'd like to find is a small hub motor that I can slap on the rear of a 1990ish nissan sentra. That way I can use my (front wheel drive)ICE for in town, charging and getting up to speed and the hub motor to keep me going at high speeds on the highway (65-75mph). I don't neet to go 0-60 in 5 seconds. I drive about 170 miles a day round trip. Even getting 30 or 40 miles a trip would work for me.
Posted by: richard | Apr 8, 2007 2:29:22 PM
Please build this for the rest of us NOW. MOVE it MOVE it MOVE it. No more stalling. I can't take all this foot dragging - SOMEBODY build this car NOW for the rest of us!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Aiden | May 28, 2007 12:09:17 AM
There is an in wheel motor being tested right now that will fit inside of an 18 inch rim. Very efficient
Posted by: CMRTOM | Jul 4, 2007 9:25:14 AM
Hey, all this idle chatter about PML's Hybrid Electric Mini reminds me of Mark Twain saying, "Everybody complains about the weather, but nobody ever does anything about it."
Let's all start doing something positive about this,now.
We all know we need this technology, now!
We all know we will never see it come from GM or Ford.
We have long known it can be done, now.
(PML has physical proof, right now, but Ferdinand Porsche showed a working front wheel drive hybrid electric with wheel motors in Paris in 1900. See Wheel Motors on Wikipedia)
We have all had good ideas to improve our transport.
And we all know more minds are better than one.
We all know we cannot build a car company by ourselves.
But, together, we could build an economy commuter vehicle manufacturing business in our country, or in every country, if we organized enough interest.
I invite anyone who is interested in participating (whether with capital or 'sweat equity') in an open cooperative (LLC) global commuter vehicle company based upon the cottage-industry model of the Swiss watch industry to contact me at lmaden@frontiernet.net, or 712-636-4490.
I am a highly-experienced Manufacturing Engineer with my own small machine shop and a spectacular two-passenger three-wheeled commuter vehicle designed to use off-the-shelf power transmission components, but I cannot buy suitable wheel motors off the shelf (nobody makes what a single commuter needs to run atleast minimum Interstate highway speeds), so I need an Electrical Engineer with a motor winding shop to help complete this exciting development.
Then we will need marketing expertise, a sales force, a service network, and on, and on, we will build an effective organization, one person at a time.
If you want change, work for change, send me your interests and capabilities, now! Larry M. Aden
Posted by: Larry M. Aden | Jul 7, 2007 8:37:49 AM
I sent a price quote to PML some months ago.. 7500£ each for the smallest of their in-wheel engines (350Nm,40kW), And 4000£ for the control system.
Add Altairnaro batteries for 40000$ or so..
Add a regular size car..
Then you have a great, but expensive, all electric car.
just around 100000$
nice :-)
Posted by: AndreasH | Jul 11, 2007 4:14:14 AM
I hate to spoil the party but there is one glaring point everyone has missed... It doesn't drive! They admit the car has never driven under it's own power.
The crew at PML claim to have been working on these wheel motors for over 5 years. The Mini show car was displayed at the British Motor Show in mid-2006 and it STILL doesn't drive.
Two "car companies" have announced developments based on the PML wheel motor, yet it's never be shown running.
The last time I saw a TV promo for this wheel motor from 25th June 2007 on the BBC it still wasn't running and they wheeled out some uni prof talking about Artificial Intelligence controlling the wheel motor, steering and suspension... they are officially out to lunch!
Posted by: Paul | Jul 15, 2007 3:48:58 AM
7500 UK pounds EACH for a 40Kw PM pancake motor?? That's USD$ 15,280.09 EACH!
x 4 = USD $61,120.36 just for motors.
not including the inverter which is USD $8,149.30.
And the car has never driven under it's own power in 5 years of R&D??? LOL
Totally out-to-lunch!!!
Posted by: Paul | Jul 16, 2007 5:49:11 AM
na
Posted by: Damian Flynn | Jul 26, 2007 11:38:07 AM
This concept is getting close to where we should have been years ago but in reality all of this is nothing but an extention of the same old Automobile Cartel junk and the BIG 3 Junk mentality with little thought for the people and their real needs and the needs of energy conservation.
The problem with wasted energy is in the manufacturing and consumerism mentality itself, the energy waste is in manufacturing of new vehicles especially these ineffective hybrids that we see on the market today. They are only a feeble attempt to mask the real problem and solutions. The cars on the highways today are junk and have been for over 75 years. The proposed hyprids are only another extended form of that same junk and the junk mentality that thrives on them.
The automotive and energy business must be taken away from the big corporations and the government who is manipulated by the corporations or you will have nothing but the same - "the wolf disguised as the sheep" seemingly there to solve the energy problems but in reality only there to scavange the money from the people while running in fear.
Another problem with the energy conversation menatlity is it does no good to conserve energy if there is no thought into reducing the very thing that is guilty of wasting and squandering that energy - man himself! Man will use X amount of energy no matter how you cut it. Man has to get off his high and mighty pedistal or face the inevitable music - his own extinction. The earth and other life will keep on turning and doing very well without us.
However,
If one wants to build a energy reducing vehicle this is what it will look like in a nutshell. These can virually be built "off the shelf" with todays technology - no big genious needed here:
First what we need to do is to retro fit kits to be able to utilize and convert our recently purchased gas guzzlers made by the Automobile Cartel. Otherwise these will still be on the road until they reach their 'designed in' and pretermined failure times.
A new concept - a new mentality:
This concept will apply to motorcycles, automobiles, trucks (especially ice highway trucking), railroad trains, plus new rubber/road trains, heavy equipment, sea going vessels and so on.
The retro kit should look something like this:
Power section: There will be a DC power section that will utilize several types of power in parallel;
1. A lightweight biofuel turbine generator set. This will run thousands of hours between overhauls as opposed to the common internal "distruction" engine currently marketed by the Auto cartel.
2. A solar capping system that tops off the batteries/capacitors energy while parked.
3. The latest fuel cell technology when reliable, affordable and practical to use.
4. As new and improved power technology evolves, rather than trade in your chassis, you would just add or replace a power unit. Having redundant power units provides more security and reliability and choices. For instance using more Solar in the West in place of engine power.
Storage System:
1. Capacitors: The body of the vehicle would be a layered capacitor itself that will store energy. It will be biodegradable and would be fed to the cows at the end of it's useful life.
2. High efficiency, lightweight battery only needed to start the turbine generator to begin the process. The capacitors would be the working storage system.
Body:
Bodies will be designed in many interchangeable styles. Standard and custom bodies that can be replaced as much as the owner wants. You have a fender bender? Feed the old body to the cows and put a new model on your "lifetime chassis"
Lifetime Chassis/Frame:
The frame would be lightweight tubular protective chassis covered with the CapBody.
Under carraige:
The undercarraige, unlike the conventional junk put out for the last 75 years will be aerodynamic and will actually provide lift and drag as needed to provide "lift", "floating", "turn-hugging" and "braking"(drag) all controlled by computer as well as manual.
Drive motors:
Independent drive wheel motors on every wheel. Each drive motor would have regenerative braking that instantly recharges the CapBody rather than turning to wasted heat. The wheel motors will also incorporate resistive braking for emergency stops. Wheel motors will come in standard sizes (car, truck etc) and incorporate the resistive brakes and will be interchangeable from vehicle to vehicle to save production energy (the highest waste and abuse of energy). Eventually wheel motors will be changed out as easy and cheaply as tires are today. Imagine pulling into your WalMart and getting new tires, motors and brakes all at one time and at a discount price. At least that's what the target should be.)
Braking:
1. Regenerative
2. Resistive (friction)
3. Chassis braking.
Steering:
Joystick type also linked to "rudder pedals" for foot control when desired. Speed control would be set with a throttle lever much like an aircraft. Power would be set by the computer - whatever is needed to maintain speed or economy whichever mode is selected.
Turning:
By using wheel motors, all wheels can also be steered or used to help in the turn to get the best turn results. Conceptually the truck can stop, all wheels can rotate 90 degrees, and the truck can virtualy drive sideways a preset number of inches or feet to a parking spot.
Anti Skid/Anti Jackknife:
Since all wheels will be controlled by a central micro processor, in a turn for example using a semi truck pulling multiple trailers, each wheel speed will be computed and sent to the wheel. In a turn each wheel will recieve a unique speed required for that variably changing turn algorythm. This means that skids and jackknifes are impossible to achieve by accident.
(visualize an 18 wheeler truck or a railroad train with all drive wheels and applicable powerunits as required)
Feel free to contact me if you have other ideas to enhance this concept.
BDutton
bdt5@cox.net
Posted by: B Dutton | Jul 30, 2007 10:22:21 AM
Hello to all Americans here. I want to ask you a simple question: aren't you the same muscle-car nuts who didn't care much about the handling of their beloved Mustangs and Chargers with their rear live axle transmissions? So what's this big concern about the unsprung weight?:)
Posted by: Lucian | Nov 1, 2007 2:16:02 AM
The in wheel motors are a good idea, but it may be impossible to register a converted car without conventional brakes. The yearly inspection would also be impossible. Mr. Dutton is right: friction brakes need to be built into the power module.
Posted by: John McManus | Nov 5, 2007 4:40:42 AM
I think the 20 pound wankel based air motor developed in australia woud be the ultimate in-wheel motor.The tanks coud be extruded as the chasis with some kind of central backup electric system and onboard compressor. I allways liked the hydralic launch from stored energy from regenerative braking.Capacity is allready in the grid.And if we went to all electric the grid would reward people coming up with distributed generation. As for global warming its a done deal better start planning on huge population movements in 50 years.The methane gas being relesed by the rotting moss and water mixture in the north of canada and russia have created a positve feedback loop impossible to reverse.
Posted by: chuck | Dec 11, 2007 4:58:13 AM
why is it that the US uses 1/3 of all fossil fuels that cause green house gases .yet they blame poor underpopulated canada for there problems
Posted by: mike | Jan 30, 2008 6:44:43 PM
Tesla is lauging to this from the sky!!
Posted by: robert | Mar 2, 2008 2:03:39 PM
Looks interesting lets get this electrics on the us market
Posted by: robert | Jun 5, 2008 7:00:12 PM
For all those that think this doesn't run, Volvo have created the Recharge concept based on the C30. Details can be found http://www.greencarsite.co.uk/GREENNEWS/volvo-C30-plug-in-hybrid.htm
You can also find videos of it running on YouTube if you look hard enough.
The technology is there, the only way it's gonna get cheap enough is if there's enough demand to justify mass production...the demand won't arrive until governments and corporations (most of which are in the pockets of the big oil cartels) start to invest in, and advertise the possibilities...I know about these cos I've hunted them, they should be made more available.
Try looking for details on the Toyota RAV4 EV that was used in Jersey (UK) for a while...the police used it as a patrol vehicle and it worked...but no-one found out about it till it was too late (conspiracy theorists say the BBC wouldn't document details about a working EV due to governmental pressures...make your own mind up after reading some web stories if you like).
Unless people are willing to work together (as suggested) to get a company set up converting old vehicles into modern EV's at a rate that can reduce the cost of the motors then we are wasting our time.
My opinion. Most cars could run 2 in-wheel motors (300BHP is better than most family cars) and the other 2 wheels can run high performance disc brakes as a back-up/manual parking brake system in case of motor failure and for testing laws...don't tell me no one has considered other options than 4WD 600+BHP...forget high performance for 5 minutes and think practicality.
We need to get Gordon Brown to start pushing for this technology...if incentived were there for manufacturers, I bet people would build...and I know loads of people who'd buy.
Just had to get all that off my chest.
Cheers
Posted by: Tom | Jul 18, 2008 3:09:24 PM
Why is everyone commenting on the extra un-sprung weight?
Did you not all read the facts written right here. 2kg more unsprung weight per wheel. How much do you think break discs, calipers and constant velocity joints weigh? I'll tell you, just 2kg less than one of these motors. If your so worried about that kind of difference i hope you think twice before you use tire blackener.
Posted by: | Jul 31, 2008 12:26:59 AM
Well its been over two years and no product in sight. I guess it was vaporware again. Too bad. It seemed like a good thing.
Posted by: resjt | Oct 26, 2008 7:23:08 PM
