1 / 68

Human-Electric Hybrid Vehicle

Human-Electric Hybrid Vehicle. 4 June 2008 Raymond Canzanese, ECE John Palermo, MEM Joseph Porcelli, ECE Erica Shwarz, MEM Michael Wigdahl, MEM Advised by: Dr. Bradley Layton, MEM. Overview. Problem description Vehicle overview Frame design Drive train Electrical components

chipo
Download Presentation

Human-Electric Hybrid Vehicle

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Human-Electric Hybrid Vehicle 4 June 2008 Raymond Canzanese, ECE John Palermo, MEM Joseph Porcelli, ECE Erica Shwarz, MEM Michael Wigdahl, MEM Advised by: Dr. Bradley Layton, MEM

  2. Overview • Problem description • Vehicle overview • Frame design • Drive train • Electrical components • Stability • Fairing • ASME HPVC competition • Economic analysis • Socio-environmental effects

  3. Problem description • Urban congestion • Oil consumption (national security) • Air pollution • Obesity epidemic

  4. Energy efficiency

  5. Fuel cost

  6. Carbon footprint

  7. Average urban commute times

  8. Proposed Solution • people would like to cycle1, but… • weather conditions (comfort) • uncomfortable seat (comfort) • potential car encounters (safety) • limited fitness level (compatibility) • cultural barriers (social factors) 1 B. E. Layton, L. Jablonowski, R. Kirby, and N. Lampe, "Bicycle Infrastructure Development Strategy for Suburban Commuting," in ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2007.

  9. Vehicle overview • weather-proof shell • minimal drag • recumbent design • 3-wheel tadpole • low center of gravity • low mass • steel roll-bar, seatbelts • 3 power sources

  10. Performance targets • Top speed = 56 km/h (35 mph) • Acceleration = 56 km/h in 16.3 s • Braking distance = 18 m (60 ft) • Turning radius of 5.5 m (18 ft)

  11. Component overview • Frame • Suspension • Steering • Drive train • Electrical components • Stability • Fairing

  12. Frame design and modeling

  13. Frame design and modeling • tadpole vs. delta • back-to-back vs. front-to-back • wheelbase minimization • COG minimization

  14. Frame design and modeling

  15. Frame material selection

  16. Rs Rear fork design Rh Rp • 20" fork • Spherical bearings • Damped bicycle suspension Mx = Rsx Rloading force Mx bending moment x distance from pivot a tube radius I moment of inertia sUTS failure strength smax maximum stress SF safety factor

  17. Steering Old-20-25ft Radius New-14.5ft Radius

  18. Steering • Additional head tube • U-joint • Central column

  19. Drive train overview • Human component • Electrical component • Efficiency • Regenerative braking

  20. Human performance • 100 watt constant power output • 250 watt peak power output • 200 Newton-meters (150 ft-lbs) torque output • 80 RPM cadence

  21. Drive train design • v = 56 km/h • d = 0.5 m wheel diameter • f = 80 RPM pedaling frequency • g = gain ratio Required gain ratio of 7.35

  22. Transmission gain ratios • jackshaft • 16t freewheel to pedals • 30t chainring to rear wheels

  23. Motor constraints • Minimize mass • Minimize cost • Maximize human contribution • 50% at max speed • 20% during acceleration

  24. Motor size requirement accel

  25. Power requirement

  26. Motor/controller model

  27. Motor selection

  28. Controller selection • Proportional voltage control • Human in the loop • Pulse width modulation (PWM) • Chopper control

  29. Jackshaft Rear wheel Motor Rear pedals Front pedals

  30. Motor gear reduction

  31. Regenerative braking

  32. Regen in practice • 15 mile suburban commute, 5 stops • 6% energy recapture • Light urban commute • 10% energy recapture • Dense urban commute • 20% energy recapture • Clutch to engage/disengage the motor • Derailleur-free transmission

  33. Stability • Stable at low speeds • Riders unable to lean • Rollover stability

  34. Stability

  35. Stability calculations 20 ft turning radius = 12 mph

  36. Suspension mrear-end mass = 250 lbs b damping coefficient = 500 lbs·sec·in-1 k spring constant = 1000 lbs·in-1 x vertical displacement • Requirements: • Driver comfort • Stability • Lightweight • Design: • Integrated with head tubes • Bronze bearings for kingpins

  37. Aeroshell fairing

  38. Aeroshell design • “Teardrop” shape • Minimum Frontal Area • No Sharp Corners • Reduce Wake

  39. Aeroshell testing

  40. Aeroshell testing • Elongate tail • Longer-swept underside • Compromise between drag and size

  41. Aeroshell model

  42. Materials

  43. Aeroshell construction

  44. ASME HPVC competition • Madison, Wisconsin April 25-27,2008 • Events: • Design • Sprint • Utility • Endurance • Results: • Won sprint competition with top speed of 21.5 mph.

More Related