PowerSource

Advertisement

Power Topics: Blog filled with useful information about product applications, helpful hints, news, and advice for the busy design engineer.

Technical Editor Margery Conner's PowerSource streams the latest developments in electronic power design and related technologies.

Profile

About Me

RSS Feed

Add this blog to your RSS newsreader!

By Category

Power Management Articles

Blog

PowerSource

« Andy Grove on plug-in hybrid r... | Main | Lithium ion capacitor: Best of... »

Friday, July 25, 2008

This company wants to turn your F150 into a plug-in hybrid

My last post was about Andy Grove’s proposal to convert the US’s existing gas-guzzlers (pickups, SUVs, and van) into PHEVs. HEVT (Hybrid Electric Vehicle Technologies) is a company started out of the Illinois Institute of Technology by researchers and engineers to do just that: Here’s a photo from the Plug-in 2008 show floor of an HEVT-modified Ford F150 pickup with that $60,000 retrofit on it. The truck has an all-electric range of about 15 miles, after which it switches back to its existing gas engine for power. The truck can achieve 41mpg on a 30 miles/day mixed-speed commute.

F150 PHEV conversion - NiMH battery pack

The retrofit system is quite elegant in its simplicity: There’s no modification under the hood. The 12 kWh NiMH battery pack goes in the space behind the driver (shown above). The existing differential is modified to accept a drive shaft from the new electric motor mounted directly behind the differential, right in front of the rear bumper. (Shown below.)

F150 PHEV conversion
(There's a mirror on the floor to help attendees view the motor, which is in focus. The differential is to the left and not in focus.**)

As I mentioned yesterday, the price for the conversion for an F150 pickup is currently $60,000, but the company projects it could go as low as $10k, without any government subsidies, within two years. I spoke with Sanjaka Wirasingha, business development manager for HEVT, and asked what would drive the price down. He said volume production would allow them to invest in tooling, and in quantity pricing for the NIMH batteries. In a shop that was set up for the conversion, the kit installation could be done in less than an afternoon; labor is included in the price.

======
**NOTE (nothing to do with Power): I love my Canon SD1000 for all outdoor shots and especially taking videos, but for indoor shots I have trouble focusing in low light, and especially keeping the image from blurring in low-light close-ups. I'm kinda thinking of going to an SD850-IS for the image stabilization.

Related entries in: Automotive | Power Sources/Controllers | Power Supplies |

Reader Comments

(Add your comments)

at 7/25/2008 3:51:24 PM, Stiggle said:
I guess all of the researchers short and don't need to move the seat all of the way back.... They do better by adding the batteries as side saddle pods under the bed. No mention of the road speeds running electric only.

at 7/27/2008 8:55:44 AM, Meredith Poor said:
The problem with putting batteries in the cab is that they generate heat when they're being recharged. I have NiMH power tools and I notice the battery packs get hot when I run the tools. This would cook the driver in no time. People that convert pickups usually put the batteries in the truck bed right behind the cab (keeps the center of gravity as far forward as possible). In any case, in two years Li-Ion batteries will probably be cheap enough to use instead. One could also cover the pickup bed with solar panels when nothing else is being carried (like, most of the time). This area is over 4 square meters, where 6' x 8' = 48 square feet). During the day this would contribute about 4 kwh to the battery packs. Such a truck might use 12Kwh to 20Kwh for a daily commute.

at 7/27/2008 5:53:33 PM, docwilkie said:
This looks to me like no more than a fashion statement. Much better millage or electric range is needed to make such a vehicle practical.

at 7/28/2008 4:53:45 AM, arclight said:
All: There''s some thinking going on here, and that''s a good thing. I agree that refinement is needed, but it''s still a move forward. There''s no silver bullet out there, but a large collection of different standard bullets will create mission success just as well. Multi-fuel options in the short term are probably smartest, with a suspense date to remove standard IC engines from new car sales after that. We also need to figure ways to make use of the excess heat. The presence of a radiator indicates that we are throwing energy away. Why not run that through a turbine and power a generator or something? Larger view: It would be really interesting to see all the options laid out side-by-side on a spreadsheet, with all the costs laid out as well, and all the assumptions, data sources, and error sources / margins identified. Wonder if we could get DoE and DoT to do that as a joint venture? Final thought: Why aren''t we trying out 100, or 1000, different ideas? Perhaps the Feds sponsor a contest with a prize of $50M for the best idea, $30M for the second-best, and $20M for the third-best, and a second round with a prize of $100M for the outfit that combines the ideas best. All tax-free. $200M is chump change for this problem.

at 8/5/2008 1:35:13 PM, supton said:
So, $60k to get 41mpg? Let''s face it: under electric power, it''s only good for moving one or two people, for all of 15 miles. Any sort of loading, and I''m going to guess that range gets worse. Even at $10k, I''m not that impressed. I''d rather buy a second, smaller car. I''m sure I could get really close to 40mpg in a lightly used car at $10k. The concept is interesting, no doubt. It helps illustrate just how energy dense gasoline is, vs a battery. But really, for just a few miles, do you really need to drive?

at 8/6/2008 8:53:25 AM, Peter said:
The 12 kWh NiMH battery pack is good for 16 horsepower output for 1 hour. Or 64 HP for 15 minutes.

at 8/7/2008 12:14:53 PM, Falstaff said:
"at 8/6/2008 8:53:25 AM, Peter said: The 12 kWh NiMH battery pack is good for 16 horsepower output for 1 hour. Or 64 HP for 15 minute" Yes, but that is _average_ HP, the batteries can of course put out much more and peak power the electric motor if required. The average _required_ HP for 60 mph cruising, (just tractive load) is about 30 HP (wind/rolling resistance) which gets you 30 mins of 60 mph, or enough for short round trip commutes. Note the HP required for idling an HEV in traffic is zero unlike a combustion engine.

at 8/8/2008 11:37:40 AM, Servoguy said:
I am fascinated by the fact that everybody seems to be focused on electric hybrid vehicles. Batteries are very poor energy storage devices, and electric motors are big and heavy. A better approach is a hydraulic diesel or hydraulic gas hybrid. All of the technology except the details of the controller is already available. Here is the clincher: The efficiency of regenerating into batteries and then turning the battery energy back into mechanical energy is about 36%. The efficiency of regenerating into a hydraulic accumulator and then turning the accumulator stored energy back into mechanical energy is about 90%. Accumulators are cheap and have very long lives and can be charged and discharged very quickly. All that has to be done to make a big impact on fuel consumption is to recover the energy lost in the brakes. That gets the average car up to about 40 mpg around town. A retrofit kit for SUVs and pickups is very feasible and a lot less than $60k if it is done with hydraulics.

at 8/13/2008 2:42:47 PM, Thor said:
Servoguy: Do you have some specs on hydraulic motors that can do the job? I like the idea, but last I checked (quite a few years ago though), the efficiency of the hydraulic motors was *abysmal*. I like the idea of hybrid conversion kit... I have a lot of fun in my 69 Dodge Dart (400+HP), but since it only gets 8 MPG on premium gas, I don't have a lot of fun for long... I'm keeping the car. It would be nice if I could get it out more often; 30 mpg to a burn-out contest is an awsome idea...

at 8/19/2008 5:05:09 PM, Gary said:
I'm an EE, but I agree,some things are still done better with hydraulics or mechanical systems. Check out this link: www.designnews.com/article/7232-Hydraulic_Hybrid_Cars_No_Batteries_Required.php I first saw articles on hydraulic regenerative braking in the late'70s. With the assistance of computerized controls now days, these have pretty good potential, and much less expensive. Guess it's not as glamorous as hydrogen.....

PowerSource

Profile

RSS Feed

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Most Commented On

Archives