Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » interesting new engine design
| Re: interesting new engine design [message #67765 is a reply to message #67757] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 12:53   |
fred v
Messages: 999
Registered: April 2006
Location: pensacola, fl.
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
[quote
What happened to EV-1?
There were two production series and a yard full of mule level prototypes in the program.
The original series had lead acid batteries. That was the one where entire plant was sold out first and shut down by the new owners for:
A: lead handling issues and ongoing litigation
B: pollution source credits.
These combined to make operation of that group non-economic.
The second series for production had NiMH batteries that were supplied by Matsushita(Panasonic). There was one one actual fire reported, but they did melt the charging connector on more than a few.
My favorite was the one with the Williams APU in the trunk. There were several in this run of mules that had little diesels and SI engines as APU very much like the soon to be Volt. The entire collection was shreaded because GM was petrified of the possible litigation that might arise from a few privately held vehicles that had not been given the complete NHTSA validation. Some of that was because NHTSA could not supply test standards that were applicable to an electric vehicle.
What a Waste.
Matt[/quote]
Matt, have you seen the documentary "Who Killed The Electric Car". seems that no one wanted it except the people that drove one. Detroit, the oil companies, the govt. all wanted it to go away.
i understand how our whole economy is based on the IC engine and that it will take a long time to slowly switch over to a plug in electric if ever. i hope it happens.
Fred V
'77 Royale RB 455
P'cola, Fl
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: interesting new engine design [message #67775 is a reply to message #67765] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 14:27 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
""Matt, have you seen the documentary "Who Killed The Electric Car". seems that no one wanted it except the people that drove one. Detroit, the oil companies, the govt. all wanted it to go away.
i understand how our whole economy is based on the IC engine and that it will take a long time to slowly switch over to a plug in electric if ever. i hope it happens.""
The EV-1 had a lot in common with our GMC's. They served as a test bed for many new technologies the have or will be rolled out in full production. There are a lot of misconceptions about that program and what it was meant to do. Again, conspiracy theories get the press.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] interesting new engine design [message #67777 is a reply to message #67767] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 16:55 |
 |
Matt Colie
Messages: 8547
Registered: March 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Karma: 7
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| ljdavick wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 14:09 |
<snip>
I've always wondered why turbines weren't more prevalent for generating electricity on small sites. I had always tought that big diesel motors powering generators would be less efficient than small natural gas powered turbines. But then, I'm just guessing!
Larry Davick
The Mystery Machine
|
Larry,
There is a very simple fact that has kept gas turbines flying and not sitting still. (An exception will be noted after the relevant discussion.)
Gas turbines have one big feature, very high power to weight ratio. They also have two very large considerations, very high cost to manufacture and really poor (high) part load fuel rate.
Diesel engines have two big features relatively inexpensive to manufacture and very good part load fuel rate. Diesel engines have one consideration, low power to weight ratio.
The cost to manufacture a gas turbine is so high that when a "hot section" job - replacing all the parts that see fire - has to be done, it is just a little cheaper than buying a new power unit (engine).
The internal parasitic loads on a gas turbine do not decrease with output power. This is such that one unit we were mapping had a fuel rate at idle that was just a little less than 3/4 of the full power fuel rate. At design load, the unit had a fuel rate that was diesel-like (0.48#/shp-hr). Diesels almost don't use fuel at idle and that scales through the load curve.
Small gas turbines were starting to show up in the early 70's. Fuel was not a big cost issue until the first oil scare (learned a lot - haven't we?). Solar, Williams, Paxton and Air Research were a few of them. The military bought them and may still.
The exception that I promised to mention.
There have been more than a few recent gas turbine electric plants built all over the country (well, anyplace natural gas is economically available). These are installed as "All or Nothing" peak load units. As they are acceptably fuel efficient at design load, that is the only place that they are used. The local grid still has to be balanced with steam or hydro that does not take a beating to run at part load.
I really tried, but if you can't understand my answer, just tell me and I will try again.
Matt Colie
Matt & Mary Colie - Chaumière -'73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan with OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Near DTW - Twixt A2 and Detroit
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] interesting new engine design [message #67786 is a reply to message #67777] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 19:07 |
 |
ljdavick
Messages: 3548
Registered: March 2007
Location: Fremont, CA
Karma: -3
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Matt,
So if I understand this correctly a turbine and a diesel engine of roughly the same horse power would burn roughly the same amount of fuel near peak output. Because they are light, turbines are used in airplanes, and because they scale easily they are used in large power plants. Diesel engines are cheaper and heavier. Is that about right?
I know that this MicroTurbine company is making money selling their turbine generators for Co-Gen plants. If it's economical, then it's brilliant. Their examples are something like this - apparently anywhere a large quantity of heat is required, Hotel boilers, public swimming pools, factory boilers, etc., they put their turbines in-line before the boiler to generate electricity. The heat passes through the turbine to the boiler. The heat loss through the turbine is minimal and the electricity produced is "almost" free. In the past Co-Gen meant (to me) using some waste product as a fuel to make electricity. For instance Gilroy foods would burn the waste product from their Garlic processing to generate electricity.
Well I think it's brilliant. Did you have a chance to view the diesel turbine hybrid video? It's a European Ford and is supposedly very quiet. I can't imagine what they have to do to quite down a whiny, screaming, turbine, but they call it "Whisper."
<http://www.capstoneturbine.com/news/video/view/whisper.asp>
Which makes me wonder about our Generator / House Battery system. If the generator and batteries were better combined so that electricity came primarily from the batteries, 'till we needed the boost of the generator, like a hybrid automobile, then the generator could be sized to provide near peak output all the time. A small turbine powered by propane, gasoline, the black tank, could quietly charge up the batteries and go back to sleep.
It'll never happen. The savings in having a tiny generator would be lost to the vast battery bank, but it's kind of a neat exercise. That battery thing has been pondered by the solar guys and the equation always seems to hinge on "load." Reduce the load and everything else gets smaller.
Sorry - I'm blathering again...
Larry Davick
The Mystery Machine
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Larry Davick
A Mystery Machine
1976(ish) Palm Beach
Fremont, Ca
Howell EFI + EBL + Electronic Dizzy
|
|
|
|
| Re: interesting new engine design [message #67792 is a reply to message #67757] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 19:48 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
""My favorite was the one with the Williams APU in the trunk. There were several in this run of mules that had little diesels and SI engines as APU very much like the soon to be Volt. The entire collection was shreaded because GM was petrified of the possible litigation that might arise from a few privately held vehicles that had not been given the complete NHTSA validation. Some of that was because NHTSA could not supply test standards that were applicable to an electric vehicle.
What a Waste.
Matt ""
The electric car started life in my group in Engineering Staff at the tech center. Many proof of concept vehicles were made before it was deemed ready to move towards a "production program". The fact that the "production" units were leased not sold is a good tip off for what the eventual outcome was going to be after several years of in the field experience. History tends to embelish and glorify what was never intended to be in the first place.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] interesting new engine design [message #67815 is a reply to message #67786] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 09:11 |
|
Matt Colie
Messages: 8547
Registered: March 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Karma: 7
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Larry,
I'm going to post answers and responses as required by number at the bottom.| ljdavick wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 20:07 |
Matt,
So if I understand this correctly a turbine and a diesel engine of roughly the same horse power would burn roughly the same amount of fuel near peak output. Because they are light, turbines are used in airplanes, and because they scale easily they are used in large power plants. Diesel engines are cheaper and heavier. Is that about right? (1)
I know that this MicroTurbine company is making money selling their turbine generators for Co-Gen plants. If it's economical, then it's brilliant. Their examples are something like this - apparently anywhere a large quantity of heat is required, Hotel boilers, public swimming pools, factory boilers, etc., they put their turbines in-line before the boiler to generate electricity. The heat passes through the turbine to the boiler. The heat loss through the turbine is minimal and the electricity produced is "almost" free. In the past Co-Gen meant (to me) using some waste product as a fuel to make electricity. For instance Gilroy foods would burn the waste product from their Garlic processing to generate electricity. (2)
Well I think it's brilliant. Did you have a chance to view the diesel turbine hybrid video? It's a European Ford and is supposedly very quiet. I can't imagine what they have to do to quite down a whiny, screaming, turbine, but they call it "Whisper."
<http://www.capstoneturbine.com/news/video/view/whisper.asp> (3)
Which makes me wonder about our Generator / House Battery system. If the generator and batteries were better combined so that electricity came primarily from the batteries, 'till we needed the boost of the generator, like a hybrid automobile, then the generator could be sized to provide near peak output all the time. A small turbine powered by propane, gasoline, the black tank, could quietly charge up the batteries and go back to sleep. (4)
It'll never happen. The savings in having a tiny generator would be lost to the vast battery bank, but it's kind of a neat exercise. That battery thing has been pondered by the solar guys and the equation always seems to hinge on "load." Reduce the load and everything else gets smaller. (5)
Sorry - I'm blathering again... (6)
Larry Davick
The Mystery Machine
|
1 - That is substantially correct. One thing that the large stationary units can take advantage of is heat recuperation. These are large heat exchangers that are simply impractical in most any mobile application.
2 - Co-gen is a big open category, but most cogeneration facilities involve generating electricity some way and then using the heat rejected by the generating system as motivating or building heat someplace in the operation. The waste product as fuel rarely enters the equation. I guess I'm real glad I don't live downwind of Gilroy.
3 - Nothing new here. Just like the EV1 with a Paxton APU in the trunk. I bet if Bob de Kruyff thinks back, he did see one.
4 - This is where we were headed with the all electric Travco at Thetford in 1973. It had 120V of batteries and a autostart Kohler that could also be used to heat the living spaces. The oil crisis and the Carter energy plans buried all that.
5 - You never know, there is that one strange guy;) that has solar panels all over and never uses his APU. He doesn't spend much time in Michigan.
6 - At least your not a politician. Nuffsaid
Matt
Matt & Mary Colie - Chaumière -'73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan with OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Near DTW - Twixt A2 and Detroit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 05 05:17:02 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00915 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
