Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Not so sure, it is designed to work in Wales. I'd not put this design team so easily. While the business model may fail and the product disappears into the Betamax pile of beaten products I suspect it does well in the hills around the factory. It gets shown off in towns because that is where humans live. But hill climbs look good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CFEWu40H9E
It's a town car... providing it can drive over the QE2 bridge that's probably worst case, it just doesn't scale well to vehicles that are meant to travel further and in more varied conditions.
Makes sense to me, so I guess the designers would need to account for the tallest mountain in Wales, certainly worth dropping them an email and asking how it has affected their design.
I don't think I'm confusing the 2, they specifically mention that the FC is small, and that the cap's are used for acceleration and providing enough power to climb, cruise is fed from the FC. The point with climbing is you are fighting the deceleration of gravity, hence having to accelerate constantly, at some point you'll accelerate to a lesser degree and hence only be able to maintain a lower speed.
I suspect you are confusing acceleration with velocity, but go and try one, I had no such problem. Your issue about storage is valid, but it never stopped TVRs or Lotus selling.
The fuel is included in the price. Will the business model work, who knows but I've not invested in it. I can see the technology works, the business nah...
Does it mean that you have a limited height it can climb before performance changes dramatically as you stop using capacitors and move onto just the smaller fuel cell? So you are cruising up hill at 40mph and then you suddenly have to drop to 20mph? Or overtaking, you think you have enough in the capacitor and then you run out of oomph. Not a car I'd like to drive with those characteristics.
I saw a news article about the riversimple a couple of years ago. I'm not sure it would work as described then. It was being touted as a small city car (with practically no storage), but at a rental cost of £400/month. Which simply makes no sense. You can't nip to tesco's in it as you can't fit anything in it, so what's it's purpose? You can't justify it financially at £400/month (excluding fuel), is a lot for a very small car. So where's the business model? No model, no sales... I hope they've done something, but as a startup the costs might be inevitable.
Harry, you remind me of a French Engineer I used to know, who said, "never mind if it works in practice the theory says it can't so it can't". https://www.riversimple.com/the-blog/page/3/ ;-)
@BB Thanks, there. Yes, very familiar with this. Toneman's & Way's letters makes more sense. I find it hard to believe you get 50% energy recovery though it would be great if true. I don't think the F1 guys get that amount but am open to correction. No-one is talking about voltage which has to be "upped". (A Tesla has great acceleration but is using a thousand volts; a gun turret on a tank uses God Knows What volts to stay aligned). Its that conversion up to a target for a capacitor that I am asking about -
and if you have high voltage you need high insulation. As Way says, OK on a truck.
@BB Thanks, there. Yes, very familiar with this.
I'd start reading Harry https://www.riversimple.com/the-technology-behind-the-hydrogen-car/
Not able to add much to the technical discussion but scraped this from cap-xx Truck start section. The standard CAP-XX automotive module contains 6 supercapacitor cells, each rated at 1400F and 0.2 mOhm. This translates to 230F and <3 mOhm for a 16V module, which weighs in at less than 2kg and delivers a class-leading energy density of >4 Wh/kg.
MIKECC, using a basic formula I=C(dv)/(dt) I calculate that draining 50A continuously from a capacitor for 1 hour and starting from 12V discharging down to 8V to mimic a starter battery (50Ah, 12V) would require a 45000 Farad capacitor. I've scaled that up to consider vehicle storage with values like 300 Volts discharging to 252V, 4 hours at 50 Amps and it would require 15000 Farads...what, but that's only one third the capacity of the 12V version...wtf?
Drawing a constant current from a capacitor results in the voltage dropping at a constant rate. In the second example I'm allowing the voltage to drop 12 times further, which ordinarily would take 12 times longer, but to last 4 times longer instead only takes one third the capacitance. It should be noted that it would have taken 25 hours to charge up the capacitor to 300V at 50 Amps in the first place, whereas the 12V example would have charged up to 12V in only 3 hours at 50 Amps. Using the original capacitance of 45000 Farads would hold the voltage to 288-300V for 3 hours drawing 50A, but would take 3 days to charge to 300V at 50A (or 12.5 hrs at 300 Amps).
btw, I'm prone to silly calculation errors, so let me know if there's something fundamentally bone-headed about the above.
As one who is familiar with traditional capacitors, I am interested to know how many farads would hold the same energy as, say, an ordinary starter battery, let alone a drive train battery For me, 500 micro farads was very large! Anyone ?