Electric transmission redux

  • Thread starter richard schumacher
  • Start date



richard schumacher wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Peter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Increasing the total amount of work I need to do to propel my bicycle
>>from A to B is unlikely to either increase my comfort or provide
>>greater pleasure.

>
>
> You're right, there is a better way to do this. Adapt Toyota's system
> of a continuously-variable planetary gear transmission (1), substituting
> it for the chain and derailleur on an electric bike. That way you'd get
> the efficiency benefit of direct mechanical drive, continuously variable
> gear ratio, and on-demand electric motor assist. It wouldn't have to be
> much bigger or heavier than existing internally-geared hubs and would be
> completely sealed.
>
>
> (1) see here for a description
> http://home.earthlink.net/~graham1/MyToyotaPrius/PriusFrames.htm
> click on "Understanding [...]"

Now I am sucked into this. The only infinitely variable transmission I
have ever seen or read about was a system of varying cones and a drive
belt. Tolerable for a car but not too good for a bike. A planetary gear
system is not variable unless someone has invented a good way to change
the number of gears on the fly. The best automotive transmission in the
early days was the 1955 vintage Cadillac 4 speed hydromatic. It had 2
planetary sets with different ratios and used both for first, the low
one for second, the higher one for third, and direct for fourth. With an
overdrive it could have become an 8 speed and got some good mileage.
Now, back to bikes. Batteries, are heavy, but going down in weight and
up in efficiency thanks to the cell phone craze. Lead-acid is just about
history, Ni/Cads are on the way out, NiMH have about four times the
capacity of a Ni/Cad, and the Lithium Ion and Lithium polymer have the
least leakage and highest power per pound, but are of course the most
expensive. If good and affordable Lithium batteries become available
expect to see more electric bikes. Right now the ones I have seen (in
person) have lead-acid and will need a new battery pack if you forget
them for more than about 4 months due to self discharge and 'Sulfating'
of the battery. If any of you are sci-fi readers and are familiar with
Heinlein you may 'Grok' this. Read "Stranger in a strange land", great
book. Back to one final note on infinitely variable transmissions, they
would have to be electric, augmented by finite gears to be kept in a
best operating mode for power out and regen power in. The electronics
can help but it can't get power from a 10 RPM motor shaft speed if that
same motor is expected to go up to 10,000 RPM at some point. A brush
less DC motor with rare earth elements on the rotating assembly and some
clever controls and wiring on the housing would be the best that I can
think of, being one of those EE nerd types (at work that is). The
Samarium Cobalt or Neodymium composite magnets are a bit pricey though
for use in a bicycle. I used 1" x2" x 0.5" magnets in a control system
that were over $100 each, but strong enough to give you a smashed finger
if you were not careful. Maybe in ten more years.
Bill Baka
Post for the week (holidays).
 
Bill Baka wrote:

> ...If any of you are sci-fi readers and are familiar with
> Heinlein you may 'Grok' this. Read "Stranger in a strange land", great
> book....


The Shipstone power storage device was from "Friday".

--
Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island
 
Tom Sherman wrote:
> Bill Baka wrote:
>
>> ...If any of you are sci-fi readers and are familiar with
>> Heinlein you may 'Grok' this. Read "Stranger in a strange land", great
>> book....

>
>
> The Shipstone power storage device was from "Friday".
>

Nice to find another 'addict'. There are not too many writers coming up
to the level of the masters. I got spoiled on Heinlein and Asimov, not
to mention Clarke, whose name is immortalized by the Clarke belt, which
he predicted for geostationary satellites. Good reading for those non
ridable days. California winters just don't get it.
Bill Baka
 
In article <[email protected]>,
richard schumacher <[email protected]> writes:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Peter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> Increasing the total amount of work I need to do to propel my bicycle
>> from A to B is unlikely to either increase my comfort or provide
>> greater pleasure.

>
> You're right, there is a better way to do this. Adapt Toyota's system
> of a continuously-variable planetary gear transmission (1), substituting
> it for the chain and derailleur on an electric bike. That way you'd get
> the efficiency benefit of direct mechanical drive, continuously variable
> gear ratio, and on-demand electric motor assist. It wouldn't have to be
> much bigger or heavier than existing internally-geared hubs and would be
> completely sealed.


This is too much complexity.

And inflicting a bicycle with so much complexity would
monsterize it so it's no longer a bicycle.

That bicycles are simple doesn't mean they're underdeveloped
structures begging to have complicated 'improvements' hung on
them; rather, their simplicity is the sublimate of an ongoing
process of refinement. I see bicycles as support mechanisms
for people to /glide/ on ball bearings, with human inputs.
If you want to design an electric motor scooter, that's fine
with me. But it won't be a bicycle.

I figure you've invested a lot of thought in this, and I'm not
chiding you for being a heretic. Well ... maybe I am, a little.
But not in a mean or ill-natured way. I do applaud your creativity.


cheers,
Tom


--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
"Bill Baka" wrote: (clip) The only infinitely variable transmission I have
ever seen or read about was a system of varying cones and a drive belt.
Tolerable for a car but not too good for a bike.(clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I believe Richard misspoke when he referred to the Toyota system as
"planetary." It is so clever in design that I am compelled to describe it.
The car uses a gearbox with a DIFFERENTIAL setup, and fixed gears. One
shaft onput comes from a gasoline engine, and another comes from an electric
motor/generator. These two inputs are "added" and delivered to an output
shaft that drives the car. A computer controls the two inputs so the output
is continuously variable. Thus, you have system with variable RPM over a
wide range, with no steps.

On a bicycle, the gasoline engine would be replaced by the pedals, but how
would a computer control the pedal RPM and torque?
 
Leo Lichtman wrote:
> "Bill Baka" wrote: (clip) The only infinitely variable transmission I have
> ever seen or read about was a system of varying cones and a drive belt.
> Tolerable for a car but not too good for a bike.(clip)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I believe Richard misspoke when he referred to the Toyota system as
> "planetary." It is so clever in design that I am compelled to describe it.
> The car uses a gearbox with a DIFFERENTIAL setup, and fixed gears. One
> shaft onput comes from a gasoline engine, and another comes from an electric
> motor/generator. These two inputs are "added" and delivered to an output
> shaft that drives the car. A computer controls the two inputs so the output
> is continuously variable. Thus, you have system with variable RPM over a
> wide range, with no steps.
>
> On a bicycle, the gasoline engine would be replaced by the pedals, but how
> would a computer control the pedal RPM and torque?
>
>

I did go to a site that gave a very good breakdown of the drive
mechanism, and it was planetary but with a few twists and a few more
drawbacks. The motor drives the sun gears, the ring gear drives the car
and has the big motor, and the sun gear has a motor to manage the other
two. Both motors are also generators but there are some wasted power
modes that could be improved on. They could do better, since I had a
1965 Renault that got up to 54 MPG and a 1961 Rambler aero-brick that
would get 35 MPG at 65 MPH. I saw that the electric car wanted to run
its engine in the 1,000 to 2,000 RPM range most of the time, and that is
a good point for efficiency. 150 HP at 6,000 RPM doesn't mean squat
except that half the power is going to make the pistons go up and down
really fast. At 1,000 RPM the main loss mechanisms are leakage past the
rings, friction of the rings, and the large amount of heat going out the
tailpipe and radiator. If someone comes up with a good heat recovery
power plant (super Stirling engine?) 100 MPG should not be impossible.
Bill Baka
 

Similar threads

R
Replies
67
Views
2K
B
R
Replies
17
Views
6K
R