A Plan of a Hybrid Car to Help the Environment

Hello everybody. I've worked on a plan of a hybrid car for about a year. My intention was to help the environment. I started a review on the existing possibilities and I found out the electric vehicles are interesting options. So I focused on removing their disadvantages and I reached to the present document. I hope to improve it by the help of experts. Also I like a company or person would determine to build it; because I cannot by myself. I'm just a man of theory without any equipments. However, I will keep contacting to active companies about my plan with the hope of realizing it someday. If this plan would gain attention from the people who care about the environment and future of the planet, that would be a contribution of mine to the world.
You can download my plan, a 60-pages PDF file from one of these links:

vixra.org...
www.4shared.com...

Cheers,
MM

P.S.: This thread can also be related to the Peak Oil Discussion Forum Topic List, but I thought it might be better to put it in here.

Well, if you did a little research you would know that a compressed air car has already been in the works by several different companies. However, there are several disadvantages to them. Honda Air is an example of a compressed air car, but I am not sure how it operates differently than your plan. I can already tell you right now that a compressed air car will never take off in the US because they have to be lightweight and would be crushed by a truck.

I like your attitude, and I like new ideas. Honestly though, what our planet needs is not "Green Technology", it's awareness that a few powerful elite should not control the future of mankind.
Freedom first, with all the negatives that follow...it's always a battle, but lets fight that battle.

reply to post by Rhino5

The West Coast here in the US once had state of the art transportation. Cheap, reliable, functional electric cable cars. Our electricity was provided by hydro plants.
Sadly, our country is more Facist than democratic...this cheap and functional transportation didn't sell cars, fuel and tires...so we now have polluted cities, slavery to oil and a yearning for 100 year old concepts.

reply to post by mansouryar

Hello friend ,
My name is sunk from Philadelphia pa. I read up on ur thread and saw ur idea. I think it's a good idea, and I am working on something like that myself. Plz email me at [email protected]. I really would like to talk to u and maybe can use ur help.

Thanks
Sunk

You should take a look at this website. CLICK HERE

This was the inventor featured in Who Killed the Electric Car( I think I got the right documentary).

The designs and ideas featured are light years ahead of anything else I have seen. This first electric car was killed by the Governator to push his hydrogen car scheme which has failed miserably.

Anyways I like where your head is and keep the ball rolling. As a society we can overcome the petrol dependencies imposed on us.

nice design there sport

old tricks are the best tricks
like this 'green transport"

reply to post by Highlander64


This "green transport" you speak of was considered dirty 100 years ago. Cars when they started were considered cleaner alternatives to horses.

reply to post by mansouryar


Compressed air has some major drawbacks - the one being "where do I get compressed air?"

It's not just an energy problem - it's a distribution problem. People will not buy cars they cannot travel with. The U.S. is far more sparsely populated with much more distance between cities and individual homes than many European (and certainly Asian) environments. My commute tomorrow is going to be about an hour round-trip, and that's fairly standard.

I can't just rely on being able to plug it in at home and let it charge. I have to be able to charge-on-the-go (which means some kind of station).

Fueling stations aren't going to purchase and maintain systems that service cars that are not popular.

... You begin to see the problem. It's not so much an issue of "can we build it" - but so much as "how are we going to introduce it?"

Further - I think you're going the wrong direction with this.

If I had a lot of money to simply throw into my car, I have several changes I would make to the overall design. First - the wheels would come off and the transmission would be yanked. The electrical system would be gutted and the engine shifted with a generator (larger alternator) being driven by said engine. A parallel array of capacitors and batteries would be charged from a rectifier/regulator before being fed into a more sophisticated power management and distribution system.

From this, a system of computers and logic arrays would control the new wheels - each a motor in and of itself with integrated Electromagnetic braking (and recovery) capability, as well as a host of other technologies that make electric motors attractive over primitive shaft-driven varies. This is 2010 - we have had the manufacturing capability for this for well over 30 years (yay for government regulation and control over markets).

Of course, I'd also overhaul the surface of the vehicle to improve laminar flow (can be done with a series of dimples or some other precision surface work that has never really caught on because of the manufacturing complexity and the fact that it is one more thing for people to tear up).

Steering would also be electrically controlled, and I'd have an array of sensors to detect surface conditions and act on each wheel to provide the most stability/control to the driver.

In future models, the engine and alternator would be replaced with a hydrocarbon-catalyzing fuel cell that would boost fuel-to-road efficiency by about 100% (IE - it would be nearly twice as efficient as the standard engine - which would already see about 20-30% efficiency improvements by eliminating archaic drive chains and the losses associated with 'revving' for accelerating).

I'd also replace the windows with a variety that has an outer and inner coating of transparent aluminum.

Future revisions would have a miniature Vertical Launch System placed in the trunk with each missile being independently guided to its target by Inertial systems based on miniaturized laser-ring gyros (about the size of your standard model rocket, just equipped with basic guidance systems and an impact detonated warhead with some fragmentary properties). This would go along with a LADAR system used for navigation, terrain mapping, and ordnance delivery.

Just seeing who is paying attention....

.... though it would be awesome to build myself a car with miniature surface-to-surface missiles..... Played a little too much Vigilante 2nd Offense and Twisted Metal as a kid, I believe.....

reply to post by mansouryar


The only thing i can recommend is: built it. Buy a cheap car for under 500 dollars (no need for a running engine ofcourse) and built it. Talking is cheap, building a prototype is epic! bet there are several people in your area also interested in projects like that who can even help you out.

On paper everything looks nice and great, until you do trail and error it's just that an idea on paper. I made some screw-ups on things that looked great on paper, but with trail and error you improve it. I came a long way in 'free-energy' right now as a prototype.

In my opinion, people need to get over the whole weight/size issue. If a big truck hits you in a mini van it will still get crushed just as bad as a smaller car. It all depends on the metals thickness, hardness and shape, you do want "some" crumple, but not so much that the people in the car crumple too. It's complex, on the one hand, having a super heavy and non-crumpling truck will let you crumple others that are SOFTER then you, its gonna take alot of gas, if there is another truck of the same weight but its even harder then yours, you get the damage. Light weight cars can also be pushed alot easier, so alot of the impact energy could be lost to the road as it moves before it crumples too much. Then there are G-forces... At that point when does the weight war end?

Weight is a huge issue when it comes to the amount you pay at the pump, its not just double the weight, double the amount of gas used. If you double the weight, keep the acceleration, air resistance, friction the same you need four times the amount of gas! So you have to weigh whats more important, money/environment or the risk of a crash.

Also, even though electric motors may have the torque at one RPM, it is still more efficient to have a multi speed transmission. Its the same reason you have one in gas powered cars and on bikes.

reply to post by Aim64C


Ideally the vehicle should charge while it is in use as well as when it is at rest, without any reference to external power sources. Battery technology needs to be advanced to the point where you can store a hundred thousand miles of travel in a battery and require no other powersource for your wheels. Messing about with any other methods like stationary recharge points is going to hamstring your vehicle and require too many other companies being involved.

Originally posted by Rhino5
reply to post by Highlander64

 

This "green transport" you speak of was considered dirty 100 years ago. Cars when they started were considered cleaner alternatives to horses.

Meh, the whites can use the carriages and the mexicans can clean up the dung and sell it as fertilizer. Im NDN.. Ill just steal your horse.

In reality, thats a great excuse. It wasnt more dirty. It certainly didnt damage the planet like cars do. But Im a hypocrite, I love my vroom vroom that goes blub blub when I start it up.

Two technical discussions about my plan:
www.ultimatecarpage.com...
www.sciforums.com...
This planet is dying and many people do not want a real change. I don't know what would be the future, but it probably won’t be a good thing.
I will come back and reply to your comments, thank you all.

reply to post by TrueBrit

Ideally the vehicle should charge while it is in use as well as when it is at rest, without any reference to external power sources. Battery technology needs to be advanced to the point where you can store a hundred thousand miles of travel in a battery and require no other powersource for your wheels. Messing about with any other methods like stationary recharge points is going to hamstring your vehicle and require too many other companies being involved.

I do not want to be driving a vehicle with a battery system carrying the equivalent power that is held in over 320x that which is held in a tank of gasoline for a vehicle of that size (figure a little over 300 miles to each tank, which is about average for most vehicles). That energy is capable of being released quite violently in almost any method of storage - and I don't want to be around when those batteries are cracked open in a wreck. I'm not quite sure what form their energy release would take - but I don't want to find out.

Not only that - but batteries are a -long- way away from being mass or volume equivalents to hydrocarbon fuels in terms of energy density - let alone superiors. You're going beyond chemical battery technologies and into some realm of "quantum capacitors" (whatever those are - Quantum-* is kind of a indirect way of saying: "magical") or something equally beyond our ability to create.

Returning to the real world, that means we are not going to be able to operate our vehicles without some kind of fuel to burn. At present, we must rely on forms of combustion engines - but this will change in a decade, or so, as direct hydrocarbon catalyzing fuel-cells will begin to mature and reach marketable stages of development - which will offer nearly a 2-fold improvement over engine efficiencies and eliminate the need for any moving parts outside of wheels and steering (well, windows and the like - but you get the idea).

Following a breakthrough in fusion or some other source of electric generation - the car, itself, doesn't really care what is providing it electricity - so long as it is being provided enough (unfortunately - solar will never be sufficient to run anything you recognize as a vehicle in a practical manner).

Remember - things like Air Conditioning and heating all require massive amounts of power - even by comparison to physically moving the vehicle through the air/down the road. Add in stereos, lights, and other things, and you have a lot of power that must be provided for by the car's power systems. Your car's electrical system, currently, doesn't often have to deal with heat; that is all taken from the waste heat of the engine.

You can make some incredibly efficient cars... even some that -can- run under solar power but they will be bare-bones and not really something comfortable or practical for the average person's transportation needs.

Originally posted by Rhino5
Well, if you did a little research you would know that a compressed air car has already been in the works by several different companies. However, there are several disadvantages to them. Honda Air is an example of a compressed air car, but I am not sure how it operates differently than your plan. I can already tell you right now that a compressed air car will never take off in the US because they have to be lightweight and would be crushed by a truck.

edit on 30-10-2011 by Rhino5 because: (no reason given)

Thanks for making me aware of Honda air. After searching that term, I found out useful links such as:
www.laautoshow.com...
www.designboom.com...
My plan aims to use the compressed-air as a minor system to help the major propulsion, electricity. Therefore, the car won't be so lightweight and safety must be respected for that, in US or elsewhere.

I like your attitude, and I like new ideas. Honestly though, what our planet needs is not "Green Technology", it's awareness that a few powerful elite should not control the future of mankind.
Freedom first, with all the negatives that follow...it's always a battle, but lets fight that battle.

Thanks for the reply. We people need both, green tech & more awareness about the elite plans to ruin the environment & human race. I try to find a way to make the cars needless to the fuels, without considering the radical ideas like free energy. I want to be limited in the conventional, standard physics. Let's see what would this strategy lead to …

The West Coast here in the US once had state of the art transportation. Cheap, reliable, functional electric cable cars. Our electricity was provided by hydro plants.
Sadly, our country is more Facist than democratic...this cheap and functional transportation didn't sell cars, fuel and tires...so we now have polluted cities, slavery to oil and a yearning for 100 year old concepts.

Sorry to hear that. Surely clean public transportation system has bigger impacts on the earth, compared to personal vehicles.

reply to post by sunketP

Sunk, please give me some time to fix a few problems on needed hardware to log-in to skype. I would contact you as soon as I'd be able to.

Originally posted by belidged
You should take a look at this website. CLICK HERE

This was the inventor featured in Who Killed the Electric Car( I think I got the right documentary).

The designs and ideas featured are light years ahead of anything else I have seen. This first electric car was killed by the Governator to push his hydrogen car scheme which has failed miserably.

Anyways I like where your head is and keep the ball rolling. As a society we can overcome the petrol dependencies imposed on us.

Indeed, I've applied that sample in my references. My basic idea is: No fuel as much as possible, because if you need a fuel, the government could misuse this dependence to impose you tax. The electricity is good, because you can find it in many places, so the final step is reducing the need to electricity.
Using hydrogen as a fuel is not attractive to me, we suffer from similar closed-mind behaviors here in Iran as well.
... and yeah, petroleum has made a miserable country out of my place, Iran. The government has its income, so it has no need to the people's taxes, result: a religious-oil dictatorship. This is my crusade to strike it by this way ...

you should also consider building a car that has an engine based on the principles at work here.

I love the idea of an electric car, and i never understood why companies that make hybrids, didn't try to push the idea of a completely electric car hard enough. Although i do realize that it's hard to get companies to give up their entire systems.......i guess that's the whole problem though is getting people to do the right thing.

Personally i think a magnetic engine wold be far more efficient, and it would last much longer and you would never have to charge it, (if the average lifetime of the magnitism is practical).

A downside though would be: Mechanical connections.......this means more maintenance, and a slower reaction in the connection between the steering wheel and the axel for example(the reaction is almost instant in an electrical system).

Awsome post

Originally posted by Highlander64
nice design there sport

old tricks are the best tricks
like this 'green transport"

Seriously or funnily, you're right. Using some old tricks could be so effective. For example, using wheels is better than tires. Albeit, after including an advanced technology which makes them tweels.