Which KERS system do you think will be the winner?
Here is a video of Williams Flywheel type,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PcIt0FPvWQ
Here is a video of Ferrari (Battery) KERS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pqK6UeCSKo
That isn't the Williams system! It is Torotrac's! Williams do not use a CVT but a flywheel with integrated motor/generator.
I think it is cheaper than LiIon. Actual chemical processes required for manufacturing of the battery is quite expensive and hazardous.n smikle wrote:I think the Williams Hybrid system is the best but it is too expensive for road use.
The Flybrid flywheel setup would spin for about 40mins according to Jon Hilton its designer. Weighing just 25kg, 12 cm x 20cm, costing a few thousand on top of the car and nearly lasting as long as the car without servicing, the 80 or so horsepower boost, would certainly be a good option for most cars. Obviously around town it would be of limited benefit, but on open A and B roads it would be great!n smikle wrote:I think the Williams Hybrid system is the best but it is too expensive for road use.
The Li ion is similar to what present day road cars are using.
The pure mechanical Flywheel system could be the cheapest to adapt. But with friction acting How long can it rotate without stopping? A day, two days? i wonder..
I believe batteries are more convenient. Capacitors may generate huge current on discharge that potentially is more dangerous.Chaparral wrote:Why not a flywheel/capacitor arrangement then?
As a boost it would have to be on open roads/highways... but if the motor(MGU) was directly connected to the wheels than it would be ideal for putting around in the city stop & go, the main gas engine wouldnt even have to run until about 20mph or so, as modern hybrids are designed to do.scarbs wrote:The Flybrid flywheel setup would spin for about 40mins according to Jon Hilton its designer. Weighing just 25kg, 12 cm x 20cm, costing a few thousand on top of the car and nearly lasting as long as the car without servicing, the 80 or so horsepower boost, would certainly be a good option for most cars. Obviously around town it would be of limited benefit, but on open A and B roads it would be great!
The efficiency of the MGU coupled with a flywheel or battery storage unit is higher than the ICE, and higher still when compounded with Regen braking. It seems the flywheels can absorb energy at a higher rate (specific power) than the batteries. The regen braking system would be capable of stopping the car but braking distances would probably increase. In any such case the drive and braking would have to be on all 4 wheels to attain maximum efficiency.xpensive wrote:To my mind, the interesting challenge is the eficiency of kinetic energy recovery, when in theory stopping a 1000 kg car from 102 km/h is exactly 400 kJ,
which as we all know can be used to produce those 80 Hp for 6.8 seconds.
How do you go about stopping the cars without conventional breaks, while storing said kinetic energy at basically the same 60 kW-rate as at release, with a minimum of losses?