If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
wrote in message ... That there have been one hour and 100 miles flights made with the old Li-Po batteries. Even if it's half that, electrics would be viable. In what aircraft was that? None, at present. He is talking about an airplane, if it were equipped with some new batteries that are being developed, seen in an earlier link, that could have a 10 fold increase in capacity, and with quicker recharge times, as icing on the cake. -- Jim in NC |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
On Dec 23, 11:12*pm, "Morgans" wrote:
wrote in message ... That there have been one hour and 100 miles flights made with the old Li-Po batteries. Even if it's half that, electrics would be viable. In what aircraft was that? None, at present. Hmm. I don't think 10 fold would do the trick. The math shouldn't be too hard to show one way or another. P = IV. Too much ampere draw to move a plane. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
I just did a bit of playing with MathCad.
If we assume an ultralight can fly on 10HP, and we want at least 1/2 Hour, then I get 300# worth of Lead Acid batteries (4 85 A*H Deep cycle batteries), or 56 # worth of Lithium Ion batteries, in an unknown configuration. The lead acid batteries, along with 100# for a 10 HP motor and prop, weigh more than an ultralight can carry. The Lithium Ion batteries are not available off the shelf. So buy a couple hundred laptops, and improvise! wrote in message ... On Dec 23, 11:12 pm, "Morgans" wrote: wrote in message ... That there have been one hour and 100 miles flights made with the old Li-Po batteries. Even if it's half that, electrics would be viable. In what aircraft was that? None, at present. Hmm. I don't think 10 fold would do the trick. The math shouldn't be too hard to show one way or another. P = IV. Too much ampere draw to move a plane. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:52:46 -0700, "Bill Daniels"
bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote: "Vaughn Simon" wrote in message news "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message . .. Take a look at this: http://www.electronista.com/articles...owire.battery/ OK, it's just a laboratory development and needs to work it's way through all the R&D to become an actual product. But, an order of magnetude improvement? WOW! Also, Exxon (yep, the gasoline folks) is actually bringing new lithium battery technology to market. They are aimed at the EV/ hybrid vehicle market. http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1180/ Vaughn Here's an interview with Dr. Yi Cui the Stanford researcher who made the breakthrough. Yi seems to be saying that his work is complementary to the Lithium Iron (LiFeP04) batteries from companies like A123 Systems. If true, and I very much hope it is, we will get 10 hour duration electric airplanes that recharge in minutes and electric cars with 1000 mile range. Long life, Ahhh... you might get the capacity and duration, but stop and think what you'd need for a charging capacity. First, I'd figure at least 180HP at 748 per HP that 8640 watts per hour X 10 or 86,400. Neglecting losses in the motor power conversion as well as the charge and discharge If running 220 volts you could charge in 10 hours @ 30 amps, one hour at 300 amps (that's a lot of amps) or the "10 minutes or less" = 1800 amps or more at the electrical mains. There are some practical considerations here beyond the battery that at best would give a charge time of several hours. Now given (again not considering losses) 86 KWH at 10C per KWH = $8.60 Which sounds great. Even at the Republik of kalafornia's 38 cents per KWH peak time it's only $32.68 which still sounds good compared to the 8 GPH of a 180 HP Engine for 10 hours = 80 gallons at $5.00 per gallon or $400 DC motors are running in the 94 to 96% range which is really good, but I don't know about the battery charge and discharge efficiency. Think of just 10 planes stopping in for a charge on a cross country. With the minimum charge of 1 hour that would require 3,000 amps from the 220 mains or 1500 from a 3 phase 440 system. That is one industrial grade, have your own substation hook up. Even with trainers we need 3 hours duration, but they could be on the order of 100 to 120 HP and those could meet the short charge times and require batters about 15 to 20% the size above. Now used in the sport plane size category they could make for some inexpensive flying. To be competitive they still need a minimum of 500 mile range, but 500 miles on half the HP means only a quarter of the energy is required. That could make a fleet of trainers and flight training quote economical. safety, high capacity, fast charge (10 min) high current delivery, what's not to like. This could be, finally, the death nell for the internal combustion engine. Probably not right away, or more likely it'd take at least two or three decades under the best of conditions if the technology is available soon. If batteries get this good where is the electricity going to come from? We have no where near the grid capacity to power more than a small fraction of the cars on the road. Solar is great, but not at this scale at least from home even if you do live in the sunny SW. To charge in 10 hours would take a pretty big and expensive array however every little bit helps. On average the best you can hope for is 12 hours of sunlight and less than 10 of strong sunlight. Up here, this time of year it's only about 8 to 8.5 hours from dawn to dusk. Most of that is from a shallow angle and it's cloudy most of the time. Just to do my small house with a combination of active and passive the quote came out to about $50,000 up here and there are no subsidies available. When you consider the *current* low cost of electricity and natural gas this is nowhere near being economically feasible. Our electric alone is running 6 to 7 KWh per hour for a small home and we already use the energy efficient lights in almost every fixture. This doesn't count the natural gas. What this works out to is even with these high efficiency batteries the power used would well exceed the use of the average size home IF you could continue to get it. OTOH this does have lots of possibilities, but I think we are going to be stuck at the hybrid level for at least a couple of decades. Even with high capacity batteries with high efficiency charge and discharge cycles Hybrids with the ability to charge when parked would give the best we could hope for. http://www.gm-volt.com/2007/12/21/gm...-breakthrough/ There are even more efficient means of storage, but you're going to have to get that room temperature super conductor perfected. However with large capacity batteries that have *zero* internal resistance I doubt the government would permit them. Remember, dynamite contains far less energy than gas, it's the rate of release that does the damage. Now take the equivalent of a 100 or so gallons of gas and release that in a few milliseconds. With the Lithium batteries you might get a big, hot, toxic fire, but with the superconduting battery, it go "boom". Roger (K8RI) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
On Dec 21, 10:50*am, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
Take a look at this:http://www.electronista.com/articles...owire.battery/ OK, it's just a laboratory development and needs to work it's way through all the R&D to become an actual product. *But, an order of magnetude improvement? WOW! Of course, as many 'negative experts' will point out, if this thing shorts out, your airplane goes supernova. However, if this thing works out, a 10 hour, 1000NM range electric airplane is actually possible. Bill Daniels http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8Pb_psj1A8 Wil |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message ... On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:52:46 -0700, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote: "Vaughn Simon" wrote in message news "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message . .. Take a look at this: http://www.electronista.com/articles...owire.battery/ OK, it's just a laboratory development and needs to work it's way through all the R&D to become an actual product. But, an order of magnetude improvement? WOW! Also, Exxon (yep, the gasoline folks) is actually bringing new lithium battery technology to market. They are aimed at the EV/ hybrid vehicle market. http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1180/ Vaughn Here's an interview with Dr. Yi Cui the Stanford researcher who made the breakthrough. Yi seems to be saying that his work is complementary to the Lithium Iron (LiFeP04) batteries from companies like A123 Systems. If true, and I very much hope it is, we will get 10 hour duration electric airplanes that recharge in minutes and electric cars with 1000 mile range. Long life, Ahhh... you might get the capacity and duration, but stop and think what you'd need for a charging capacity. First, I'd figure at least 180HP at 748 per HP that 8640 watts per hour X 10 or 86,400. Neglecting losses in the motor power conversion as well as the charge and discharge If running 220 volts you could charge in 10 hours @ 30 amps, one hour at 300 amps (that's a lot of amps) or the "10 minutes or less" = 1800 amps or more at the electrical mains. There are some practical considerations here beyond the battery that at best would give a charge time of several hours. Now given (again not considering losses) 86 KWH at 10C per KWH = $8.60 Which sounds great. Even at the Republik of kalafornia's 38 cents per KWH peak time it's only $32.68 which still sounds good compared to the 8 GPH of a 180 HP Engine for 10 hours = 80 gallons at $5.00 per gallon or $400 DC motors are running in the 94 to 96% range which is really good, but I don't know about the battery charge and discharge efficiency. Think of just 10 planes stopping in for a charge on a cross country. With the minimum charge of 1 hour that would require 3,000 amps from the 220 mains or 1500 from a 3 phase 440 system. That is one industrial grade, have your own substation hook up. Even with trainers we need 3 hours duration, but they could be on the order of 100 to 120 HP and those could meet the short charge times and require batters about 15 to 20% the size above. Now used in the sport plane size category they could make for some inexpensive flying. To be competitive they still need a minimum of 500 mile range, but 500 miles on half the HP means only a quarter of the energy is required. That could make a fleet of trainers and flight training quote economical. safety, high capacity, fast charge (10 min) high current delivery, what's not to like. This could be, finally, the death nell for the internal combustion engine. Probably not right away, or more likely it'd take at least two or three decades under the best of conditions if the technology is available soon. If batteries get this good where is the electricity going to come from? We have no where near the grid capacity to power more than a small fraction of the cars on the road. Solar is great, but not at this scale at least from home even if you do live in the sunny SW. To charge in 10 hours would take a pretty big and expensive array however every little bit helps. On average the best you can hope for is 12 hours of sunlight and less than 10 of strong sunlight. Up here, this time of year it's only about 8 to 8.5 hours from dawn to dusk. Most of that is from a shallow angle and it's cloudy most of the time. Just to do my small house with a combination of active and passive the quote came out to about $50,000 up here and there are no subsidies available. When you consider the *current* low cost of electricity and natural gas this is nowhere near being economically feasible. Our electric alone is running 6 to 7 KWh per hour for a small home and we already use the energy efficient lights in almost every fixture. This doesn't count the natural gas. What this works out to is even with these high efficiency batteries the power used would well exceed the use of the average size home IF you could continue to get it. OTOH this does have lots of possibilities, but I think we are going to be stuck at the hybrid level for at least a couple of decades. Even with high capacity batteries with high efficiency charge and discharge cycles Hybrids with the ability to charge when parked would give the best we could hope for. http://www.gm-volt.com/2007/12/21/gm...-breakthrough/ There are even more efficient means of storage, but you're going to have to get that room temperature super conductor perfected. However with large capacity batteries that have *zero* internal resistance I doubt the government would permit them. Remember, dynamite contains far less energy than gas, it's the rate of release that does the damage. Now take the equivalent of a 100 or so gallons of gas and release that in a few milliseconds. With the Lithium batteries you might get a big, hot, toxic fire, but with the superconduting battery, it go "boom". Roger (K8RI) Dispite what the electric companies say, charging big battery powered vehicles will indeed stress the power grid - even if charging is done at night. The generation and distribution grid will have to be improved - but that will probably be neccessary anyway for electric cars. Airplanes are way down the list but it could happen. It's pretty hard not to get excited about a 10x battery improvement. (Wasn't there a thread about personal nuclear power? http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9837400-7.html ) Bill Daniels |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
"Roger (K8RI)" wrote:
Think of just 10 planes stopping in for a charge on a cross country. With the minimum charge of 1 hour that would require 3,000 amps from the 220 mains or 1500 from a 3 phase 440 system. That is one industrial grade, have your own substation hook up. Even with trainers we need 3 hours duration, but they could be on the order of 100 to 120 HP and those could meet the short charge times and require batters about 15 to 20% the size above. Now used in the sport plane size category they could make for some inexpensive flying. To be competitive they still need a minimum of 500 mile range, but 500 miles on half the HP means only a quarter of the energy is required. That could make a fleet of trainers and flight training quote economical. Do like the propane tanks and exchange them out for a small fee... This takes into consideration that they bring down the cost of making the batteries to begin with. The "local battery exchange" can then recharge the batteries using longer charge times, which would of course extend their life... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
Bill Daniels wrote:
Take a look at this: http://www.electronista.com/articles...owire.battery/ OK, it's just a laboratory development and needs to work it's way through all the R&D to become an actual product. But, an order of magnetude improvement? WOW! Of course, as many 'negative experts' will point out, if this thing shorts out, your airplane goes supernova. However, if this thing works out, a 10 hour, 1000NM range electric airplane is actually possible. Bill Daniels I wonder why we haven't seen diesel/electric aircraft... surely a small round engine would allow for cleaner airflow and you can stick the diesel wherever you want to... something like the BD-5 wouldn't have transmission/driveshaft problems (though possibly a weight problem on such a small aircraft). As technology improves, replace the diesel with batteries or fuel cells while more or less retaining CG. And something like a V22, you might even be saving weight since you can drop the physical transmissions and driveshafts. rpl |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Electric airplane - recharged
In article ,
rpl wrote: Bill Daniels wrote: Take a look at this: http://www.electronista.com/articles...owire.battery/ OK, it's just a laboratory development and needs to work it's way through all the R&D to become an actual product. But, an order of magnetude improvement? WOW! Of course, as many 'negative experts' will point out, if this thing shorts out, your airplane goes supernova. However, if this thing works out, a 10 hour, 1000NM range electric airplane is actually possible. Bill Daniels I wonder why we haven't seen diesel/electric aircraft... surely a small round engine would allow for cleaner airflow and you can stick the diesel wherever you want to... something like the BD-5 wouldn't have transmission/driveshaft problems (though possibly a weight problem on such a small aircraft). As technology improves, replace the diesel with batteries or fuel cells while more or less retaining CG. And something like a V22, you might even be saving weight since you can drop the physical transmissions and driveshafts. Because the damn Diesel-electric setup: 1. weighs too damn much 2. Adds another potential inline failure mode 3. Reduces overall fuel efficiency. -- Remove _'s from email address to talk to me. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Electric maned airplane | Flyingmonk | Piloting | 26 | July 20th 06 05:43 AM |
Electric maned airplane | Flyingmonk | Home Built | 26 | July 20th 06 05:43 AM |
Electric maned airplane | Morgans | Home Built | 4 | July 19th 06 02:28 AM |
Electric RC Helicopter for $83 | NYPT Man | Home Built | 0 | October 24th 05 06:47 PM |
Electric DG | Robbie S. | Owning | 0 | March 19th 05 03:20 AM |