Hi Mike,
There was a west coast firm ( US Flywheel ??) working on high speed
mechanical flywheels some 20 years ago. Such a device would need to oeprate
above 750,000 rpm and preferably above 1.25 mil rpm to sustain and store
sufficent energy. You can easily recognoze the inheent engineering problems
with materials without considering how to induce speed and convert recovered
energy under this scenario. Electron flywheels may allow solutions
unavailable with mechanical flywheels. I would love to have them for our
shop battery operated tools. Talk about available torque.. wow!.
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Carrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: Lightweight Ultraconducting Energy Storage
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Fickle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lightweight Ultraconducting Energy Storage
True, lightweight high-strength containment materials may make such a
system practical, although they tend to be expensive. But there's no
need to wait. Both mechanical flywheels and compressed-air energy
storage share the same characteristics in this regard: stored energy
scales directly with the strength and size (and thus mass) of the
container. Both will have the same energy capacity as a superconducting
storage system; so why wait for ultraconductors? If Kevlar is
practical, go ahead and build flywheels into electric cars!
I once heard a talk by Bitter, one of the leading proponents of flywheel
storage. The energy storage is very much a function of the spped of the
flywheel and limited by its bursting strength. Kevlar filament wound
wheels are good candidates, but significant gains would be realized if
carbon fiber could be realized. Carbon fiber nanotubes are ideal
candidates, but like Mark Golde's superconductors, they are short and the
way to make long filaments is elusive.
Flywheel systems are complex devices, requiring magnetically suspended
rotors spinning in a vacuum and complex support systems to get energy in
and out of the rotors. Containment systems are necessary in case of
bursts, although filament wheels shred rather than emitting scrapnel.
Wheels are gyroscopes, which add to the problems when you wnat to go
around corners.
An ultraconductor system is solid state and if it can be made to work at
room temperature, could be quite attractive.
Mike Carrell
Mark Goldes wrote:
Los Alamos National Laboratory patented a lightweight containment system
using Kevlar. While the Patent was in force, our firm had rights for
use with our polymers. Now that their Patent has expired we still
expect to use that lightweight system of containment for UMES electron
flywheels.
Carbon fiber may prove to be an even better alternative and we are
watching wire development progress with that extremely light material
many times stronger than steel.
Mark
From: Bob Fickle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Room Temperature Superconductors and EVs
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:50:05 -0600
Much as I'd like to have some ultraconductor wire to play with, I'm not
convinced that Ultrqaconducting Magnetic Energy Storage will replace
batteries. Magnetic fields create a pressure equal to the energy
density- and therefore require a strong (read "heavy" and "expensive")
mechanical container.
Mark Goldes wrote:
Harry,
They can be made, but not yet in wire form.
Thin films containing Ultraconductors 1 or 2 microns in diameter
(1/50th the diameter of a human hair) can always carry 50 Amperes.
The Ultraconductors run through the film in the thin direction, (i.e.
normal to the film).
Wire is 3 years and $18 million in front of us.
Once available as wire, electron flywheels can begin to replace
batteries. Ultraconducting Magnetic Energy Storage systems are
expected to prove practical.
Electric motors made with Ultraconducting wire can be much smaller and
lighter, and may require no iron. Alll plastic motors may therefore
prove practical. Superconducting motors require no iron. We suspect
the same will be true of Ultraconductors.
Mark
From: Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Who Killed the EV?
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:29:14 -0500
If room temperature superconductors can be made they would also
boost the performance of electric vehicles.
If I remember correctly, a Time magazine cover from around '86 or '87
showed an artist's rendering of a futuristic electric vehicle as one
of the
promises of high temperature superconductors.
Harry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harry Veeder
>
> Do they mean the braking system did not use friction?
>
> <><><><><><><>
>
> It used both: disc in front, electric in rear. Here are the EV-1
specs:
>
>
http://www.evchargernews.com/CD-A/gm_ev1_web_site/specs/specs_specs_top.h
> tm
>
> or
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ckaju
>
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Try the New Netscape Mail Today!
> Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List
> http://mail.netscape.com
>
________________________________________________________________________
This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T.
Department.
