🚀 go-pugleaf

>In article <72182@cup.portal.com>, Ted_Eugene_Viens@cup.portal.com writes:
>> flywheel, and the coils for electric power transfer.  Unfortunately I have n
e
>ve
>> r
>> obtained a CRC Physical Sciences reference book and I am a bit weak on vario
u
>s
>> heats of melting and vaporization.  Some crude calculations showed that to g
o
>> 600 miles at 60 mph might take some 100 to 400 MegaJoules.  Nothing to snitc
h
> at
>
>400 is about right.
>
>> I agree.  However this would be non-stop driving.  which is contrary to the
>> intended use of these vehicles in stop and go city driving.  What  reduction
>> factor would be introduced by regenerative braking?
>
>negative reduction!!  Or are you one of those free-energy fanatics who believe
>that you can get more energy out of a process than you put in?
>
>Come on!!!
>
>You put energy into the car to get it up to speed.  Then you brake - any energ
y
>recovered would be less than or equal to the energy needed to get it back up t
o
>speed.  We all know from entropy, however, that you won't get all the energy
>back from regenerative braking.  Therefore, and note carefully:
>
>Stop and go driving will require MORE energy, not less.
>
>That's right - why do you think city mpg are less than highway?  I mean, for
>city dirving, since the velocities are lower, you fight less air resistance -
>in you naive system, city driving would have better mpg.
>
>You want 600 miles of city driving, even with regenerative braking, be prepare
d
>for Gigajoule flywheels that will melt entire the entire vehicle and leave a
>hole in the street on failure.
>
>> Still, I return to my original opening remark.  I have some faith in the eng
i
>ne
>> ers
>> responsible for designing Flywheel Batteries...
>
>Really?  Hey, I got some prime Florida real estate to sell you.
>We could really make some bucks off this pup's "faith".
>
>
>--
>Richard Stead
>Center for Seismic Studies
>Arlington, VA
>stead@seismo.css.gov
>
Someone is being dense here,  But I am not so sure it is me.  The major use mos
t
people have for a car is to get from here to there in some decent amount of tim
e.
If they are going to go from LA to NYC as quickly as possible (legally,) I cann
ot
think of anything as effecient as a diesel powered car.  Nor would I recommend
anything different.  If they were going to make deliveries around town, (and
Flywheel cars had reached the economy of production of IC cars) I would recomme
nd
the flywheel car.  Turning to my Whooppee-Doo travel computer, I would probably
discover that this trip would require some tens of megajoules.  Looking at my
energy meter I would see that I had a couple of tens of megajoules to spare.
Feeling comfortalbe about my reserve, I would take off eh! on my trip about the
city.  To entertain myself at stoplights, I would make a couple of 'what if'
calculations on my travel computer.  First I would calculate the 'what if I was
using flycheel power and friction brakes' energy need.  Then I would calculate
the 'what if I was using flywheel power and regenerative brakes' energy need.
At a following stoplight, I would look down and see that the regenerative brake
trip needed LESS energy than the friction brake trip.  Thus my energy needs
would benefit from the ''reduction factor of regenerative brakes.''  This
''reduction factor...'' would be figured into the design storage capability
of my cars flywheel battery.  Seems pretty reasonable to me...
Now, truthfully, I may not suck down everything that a sales engineer tried to 
feed me.  But, I might pay some attention to what the Product Liability Dept.
lawyer's engineers were saying to them...
Would it be improper of me Richard, to request of you that you broaden your
interpretive skills a little and lighten-up some???
Bye....  Ted..