In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:38:19 +0200: Hi,
>2008/9/18 Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> IOW the electric motor plus batteries make it seems like you have 3 times >> more >> power when you need it on hills - that your genset can put out. > >Jones, the idea kind of made sense to me up to now, but Ed's sensible >objection is that IF your battery is empty --which BTW is most >probably the case otherwise you wouldn't be running on the genset-- >then you don't have enough power to keep up with the traffic. Isn't he >right to conclude that the genset must be able to provide the full >power, as it does on the GM Volt? > >Michel Not necessarily. If the trip computer knows in advance that you are going to take a long trip, then the gas engine can be turned on immediately at the start of the trip, recharging the batteries continuously, rather than waiting till they are near empty. This extends the range of the batteries, and still only requires a small gas engine while the electric motors provide full power the whole time. The trick is for the trip computer to know in advance when to turn on the gas engine. This would be possible for a vehicle with a GPS system. You tell the computer your destination before starting, and whether or not you can recharge at your destination, and it calculates when to turn on the engine, based upon the current state of charge in the batteries. It would also make sense to have a set of preprogrammed destinations (like preprogrammed radio stations, or a better analogy might be programmed cooking schemes in a microwave), for places that you visit frequently. The general idea of course is to delay the engine start as long as possible, while ensuring that the driver experiences no inconvenience. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
