The issue with making (long haul) trucks fully electric is they need high power over long periods and the occupied volume is a bigger concern than weight. Even if the power demands can be met with multiple special motors (to meet the torque demand, minimize space utilization and for redundancy), the batteries just cannot take this kind of beating. If we assume a 370v system the current draw from the batteries needs to be like 200-300amps or more. The difference between high performance electric cars and such trucks is that the cars don't need to operate at high power most of the time and the torque requirement isn't as severe in cars. (lower torque at high rpm VS high torque at lower rpm). The battery tech just doesn't seem right for this kind of power demand. If we talk about electric hybrid trucks then currently its only possible for them be parallel hybrids like the Volvo FH hybrid truck. The engine of the truck weighs about 1.2 tons and outputs 600+ bhp while it has 2-3 motors to get this power from batteries weighing 3-4 tons!!
bro u are runing on 1990s data we are using 800v (Kia,BYD,Hyundai etc have it in cars) to 1400v DC for trucks power (HP=kW) is never the issue it the range(kWh) . for more upclose look into Edison Motors & Janus Electric they share enough behind the scene and in depth technical data for 2020s tech
s2tenglish@@s2tenglish OK thanks. Agreed power and current draw can be optimized with a sufficiently large battery. But this doesn't help the core problem that is energy density not being enough for large power draw, same as saying there isn't enough range (kWh). If a hybrid truck needs 3-4 tons of batteries imagine what a fully electric truck will need. Even with battery swapping is it worth the investment tho? Not sure. All I'm saying is it looks too complicated to make it work with current battery tech and the gains may not be great. Ditching an ICE for an electric motor makes things so simple. Similarly we need a new source of power that can replace or minimize the use of batteries.
"Even with battery swapping is it worth the investment tho? Not sure " its now "been there, done that" there is no other no alternative like Seaweed biofuel and hydrogen is even worst . yes you have to swap more in contrast to a fuel truck but its not by too much and there are laws driver must stop time to time anyway . Is it perfect no is it better than full EV YES , better than hydrogen YES . You alwasy have to move brick by brick and step by step
Hello, the exchange system that you present for trucks is interesting, but the placement of a weight at height will compromise the stability of the vehicle. Why not favor a lateral placement of the batteries, on each side of the chassis, covered by a shockproof panel on the outside? The tanks of many trucks are placed this way. I know that this system has been tested on road trains in Australia and is also used for buses. have a nice day AT
truck are not cars they dont have to have same safety standards and for good reason . You do know they have heavy stuff above the wheel by default right ? cement or bulk or container or Fluid truck all have " weight at height" that is why china was able to deploy it in the field. Side mounted is an option but its not as fast as top one
27:09 Series hybrid isn't very effective in cars with the current tech at normal price levels. There are also very few models like this bmw i3. The power to weight ratio of parallel hybrid is lot better. The generator required to produce even half the drive power weighs like a small ic engine which might as well be used like a second driver in addition to charging the batts. Then it becomes a parallel hybrid.
"The generator required to produce even half the drive power weighs like a small ic engine " in 2010s that would have been true not anymore as frequency has gone up we started with 50~60hz then to 400 Hz now 500+ is easy size is much smaller and you do remove 2 core parts A multiple clutch pack B vehicle transmission
s2tenglish@@s2tenglish increasing the frequency doesn't have substantial gain in power. The 50-60hz sine curve already provides 70% of the possible power when rectified and higher freq makes it closer to 100. Axial flux motors are game changing but too expensive currently. They offer few hundreds of hp for 30-40kg motor. In comparison the bmw i3 Rex generator + ICE weigh 120kg offering 25kw (34hp) while Toyota prius (parallel hybrid) uses 110kg ICE to make over 100bhp which is the prime mover. The prius still has a generator, transmission but they cut down on battery size and the main electric motor compared to series hybrid design. Overall the power to weight ratio is better.
Does that vehicle efficiency comparison assume you get 20% of the original energy back from regenerative braking? It doesn't work that way. Also, 20% from regenerative braking, if that's what it says, is very high, that's reasonable for mostly city driving, that is, 20% of the energy after the motor, all energy lost before that remains lost. In conditions where you get 20% of the energy after the motor back from generative braking, you don't that much energy, as the average speed is low, there are plenty of electric buses and trucks that works really well without any significant drawbacks for such conditions. Also, vehicle fuel cells are not 50% efficient possibly except under very low load, you would need a gigantic fuel cell systems to power a truck at highway speeds and have 50% efficiency in the fuel cell system, that would not leave much space or weight, if any, for payload. The basic fact that the hydrogen and oxygen molecules have to "find" and react with each other from opposite sides of a barrier makes it extremely difficult to achieve reasonable efficiency and relevant power density at the same time in fuel cells. So, maybe close to 50% efficiency in the fuel cell systems, while driving in cities, but batteries works great for such conditions. So, fuel cells in conditions where fixed "non-swappable" batteries are a challenge, don't count on much more than 30% efficiency in the fuel cell system alone, if you want to have reasonable payload capacity. 70% efficiency in electrolysis, and 30% efficiency in the fuel cell system, means about 79% losses power to hydrogen and back to power that BEVs don't have in commercial applications where there's a reason to consider alternatives to batteries. Batteries have losses during charging and discharging, which are typically much smaller than the losses from compressing, cooling and handling/transporting hydrogen. Hydrogen fuel stations typically need power to operate, there are a lot of safety mechanisms, and while you wouldn't need power to equalize the pressure between the tank on the station and in the vehicle, hydrogen fuel stations typically both compress a small buffer of hydrogen, and cool it down so the heat of compression of remaining hydrogen won't damage the tanks in the vehicle, or other parts of the fuel system. Moving gas from one tank to another is not always as simple as it might seem. If you haven't already, maybe you should investigate the completely absurd engineering of hydrogen fuel stations, especially those for cars that needs to be able to deliver an end pressure in the vehicle tanks of 700 bar, and make a video, or even series of videos just about that. Some of the problems gets significantly reduced when target pressure is "just" 350 bar, but then you get less than 24 grams of hydrogen per liter of tank capacity.
The issue with making (long haul) trucks fully electric is they need high power over long periods and the occupied volume is a bigger concern than weight. Even if the power demands can be met with multiple special motors (to meet the torque demand, minimize space utilization and for redundancy), the batteries just cannot take this kind of beating. If we assume a 370v system the current draw from the batteries needs to be like 200-300amps or more. The difference between high performance electric cars and such trucks is that the cars don't need to operate at high power most of the time and the torque requirement isn't as severe in cars. (lower torque at high rpm VS high torque at lower rpm). The battery tech just doesn't seem right for this kind of power demand. If we talk about electric hybrid trucks then currently its only possible for them be parallel hybrids like the Volvo FH hybrid truck. The engine of the truck weighs about 1.2 tons and outputs 600+ bhp while it has 2-3 motors to get this power from batteries weighing 3-4 tons!!
bro u are runing on 1990s data we are using 800v (Kia,BYD,Hyundai etc have it in cars) to 1400v DC for trucks power (HP=kW) is never the issue it the range(kWh) . for more upclose look into Edison Motors & Janus Electric they share enough behind the scene and in depth technical data for 2020s tech
s2tenglish@@s2tenglish OK thanks. Agreed power and current draw can be optimized with a sufficiently large battery. But this doesn't help the core problem that is energy density not being enough for large power draw, same as saying there isn't enough range (kWh). If a hybrid truck needs 3-4 tons of batteries imagine what a fully electric truck will need. Even with battery swapping is it worth the investment tho? Not sure. All I'm saying is it looks too complicated to make it work with current battery tech and the gains may not be great. Ditching an ICE for an electric motor makes things so simple. Similarly we need a new source of power that can replace or minimize the use of batteries.
"Even with battery swapping is it worth the investment tho? Not sure " its now "been there, done that" there is no other no alternative like Seaweed biofuel and hydrogen is even worst . yes you have to swap more in contrast to a fuel truck but its not by too much and there are laws driver must stop time to time anyway . Is it perfect no is it better than full EV YES , better than hydrogen YES . You alwasy have to move brick by brick and step by step
Hello,
the exchange system that you present for trucks is interesting, but the placement of a weight at height will compromise the stability of the vehicle.
Why not favor a lateral placement of the batteries, on each side of the chassis, covered by a shockproof panel on the outside? The tanks of many trucks are placed this way.
I know that this system has been tested on road trains in Australia and is also used for buses.
have a nice day
AT
truck are not cars they dont have to have same safety standards and for good reason . You do know they have heavy stuff above the wheel by default right ? cement or bulk or container or Fluid truck all have " weight at height" that is why china was able to deploy it in the field. Side mounted is an option but its not as fast as top one
27:09 Series hybrid isn't very effective in cars with the current tech at normal price levels. There are also very few models like this bmw i3. The power to weight ratio of parallel hybrid is lot better. The generator required to produce even half the drive power weighs like a small ic engine which might as well be used like a second driver in addition to charging the batts. Then it becomes a parallel hybrid.
"The generator required to produce even half the drive power weighs like a small ic engine " in 2010s that would have been true not anymore as frequency has gone up we started with 50~60hz then to 400 Hz now 500+ is easy size is much smaller and you do remove 2 core parts A multiple clutch pack B vehicle transmission
s2tenglish@@s2tenglish increasing the frequency doesn't have substantial gain in power. The 50-60hz sine curve already provides 70% of the possible power when rectified and higher freq makes it closer to 100. Axial flux motors are game changing but too expensive currently. They offer few hundreds of hp for 30-40kg motor. In comparison the bmw i3 Rex generator + ICE weigh 120kg offering 25kw (34hp) while Toyota prius (parallel hybrid) uses 110kg ICE to make over 100bhp which is the prime mover. The prius still has a generator, transmission but they cut down on battery size and the main electric motor compared to series hybrid design. Overall the power to weight ratio is better.
Does that vehicle efficiency comparison assume you get 20% of the original energy back from regenerative braking? It doesn't work that way. Also, 20% from regenerative braking, if that's what it says, is very high, that's reasonable for mostly city driving, that is, 20% of the energy after the motor, all energy lost before that remains lost. In conditions where you get 20% of the energy after the motor back from generative braking, you don't that much energy, as the average speed is low, there are plenty of electric buses and trucks that works really well without any significant drawbacks for such conditions.
Also, vehicle fuel cells are not 50% efficient possibly except under very low load, you would need a gigantic fuel cell systems to power a truck at highway speeds and have 50% efficiency in the fuel cell system, that would not leave much space or weight, if any, for payload. The basic fact that the hydrogen and oxygen molecules have to "find" and react with each other from opposite sides of a barrier makes it extremely difficult to achieve reasonable efficiency and relevant power density at the same time in fuel cells. So, maybe close to 50% efficiency in the fuel cell systems, while driving in cities, but batteries works great for such conditions.
So, fuel cells in conditions where fixed "non-swappable" batteries are a challenge, don't count on much more than 30% efficiency in the fuel cell system alone, if you want to have reasonable payload capacity. 70% efficiency in electrolysis, and 30% efficiency in the fuel cell system, means about 79% losses power to hydrogen and back to power that BEVs don't have in commercial applications where there's a reason to consider alternatives to batteries. Batteries have losses during charging and discharging, which are typically much smaller than the losses from compressing, cooling and handling/transporting hydrogen.
Hydrogen fuel stations typically need power to operate, there are a lot of safety mechanisms, and while you wouldn't need power to equalize the pressure between the tank on the station and in the vehicle, hydrogen fuel stations typically both compress a small buffer of hydrogen, and cool it down so the heat of compression of remaining hydrogen won't damage the tanks in the vehicle, or other parts of the fuel system. Moving gas from one tank to another is not always as simple as it might seem. If you haven't already, maybe you should investigate the completely absurd engineering of hydrogen fuel stations, especially those for cars that needs to be able to deliver an end pressure in the vehicle tanks of 700 bar, and make a video, or even series of videos just about that. Some of the problems gets significantly reduced when target pressure is "just" 350 bar, but then you get less than 24 grams of hydrogen per liter of tank capacity.
20% back is from the 100% u spent in ganing the speed I did not made that data but have seen that number quoted in many papers
@@s2tenglish It should just be 20% of the energy after the motor. Not all spent energy, that's very important.
Can ships and planes also be electric
at small scale yes not on large scale
Swap like your wallet depend on it
THAT is a FACT