Raytheon HY-DRA concept

haven

Expedition Leader
Raytheon has developed a concept vehicle for the military to show off their electric drive motors.

HY-DRA3.jpg


The HY-DRA concept vehicle seats 3, with the driver in the center. The vehicle is called a hybrid, but the version shown has electric power only, good for about 16 miles of silent running. The battery pack occupies the space below the seats.

Each 17 inch wheel has its own electric motor. The combined output of the four motors is more than 800 ft-lbs of torque!

HY-DRA1.jpg


A more practical vehicle would have a small gas or diesel engine set up to produce electric power to recharge the batteries or drive the wheels directly.

There are more photos and information about the HY-DRA at the Jalopnik web site
http://jalopnik.com/379523/raytheon-hy+dra-shows-off-in+wheel-e+motors
 

boblynch

Adventurer
The motors mounted in the wheels may work for military applications, but not sure I'd want them. However, a vehicle with a very small gas or diesel motor and large battery bank could present interesting expedition options. The small motor could pull double duty as a generator, and the battery bank could be used for camping needs. A good solar setup could be used to help charge things up for the trip home.
 

haven

Expedition Leader
serial hybrid

I recently learned that a drive system that uses electric motors for motive power and an internal combustion engine to generate the needed electricity is called a "serial hybrid."

A serial hybrid can be adapted to any scale. Here's one larger example:

hemtt-a3.jpg


Oskkosh created a serial hybrid drive for its HEMTT heavy truck. A 400 HP Cummins diesel turns a 200 KW generator, which in turn drives electric motors at each wheel. Direct drive eliminates the torque converter, automatic transmission, transfer case and drive shafts. Oshkosh uses King Kong-size capacitors instead of batteries to store the power needed to start rolling.

Oshkosh says the switch to serial hybrid improves fuel economy 20%, no small matter when the standard diesel truck burns a gallon of fuel every 4 miles. Read more about the serial hybrid HEMTT here
http://www.oshkoshtruck.com/defense/products~a3~home.cfm
 

Lynn

Expedition Leader
boblynch said:
The motors mounted in the wheels may work for military applications, but not sure I'd want them.

A related technology that I read about a few years ago is the integrated flywheel/starter/generator/motor that mounts in place of the traditional flywheel.

Size the engine such that it will run the vehicle on the flats, and charges the batteries on downhills or when at a stop. When more power is needed, it uses the batteries to feed the integrated unit (it's 'motor' mode) to assist the engine.
 

Lynn

Expedition Leader
Riddle me this, Batman:

One of the big challenges of optimizing an internal combustion engine is the valve train, which is typically optimized for one particular RPM. I know that there are 'variable valve' engines out there, but AFIK they are still only optimized at a couple of points on the curve. Also, I know that there is some work being done on truly variable timing (computer controlled intake and exhaust valves). I used to work for a company that was touting an electronic-over-hydraulic system that replaced the camshaft and valves, but the parasitic drain on the engine was really huge.

One solution is a constantly-variable transmission, where the engine is held at the optimized RPM, and the tranny controls the vehicle speed. Engineers have been working on that one for quite a while, and seem to be getting nowhere.

A serial hybrid does not solve this 'optimized engine' problem since the engine RPM is still varied to control vehicle speed.

Another option is the parallel hybrid where the engine is held at the optimized RPM and used solely as a generator, and the vehicle is driven solely by electricity. This requires a large battery bank, and sufficient engine idle time for the engie to recharge the batteries. That's one reason why hybrids are better for commuter cars, delivery vehicles, and transit busses: there's plenty of idle time when the engine can be charging the batteries. On a large long-distance driver like an overland vehicle, that's not typically the case.

Someone (sorry, I don't remember the brand off-hand) makes a line of small portable generators that can be daisy-chained together to supply larger needs. So I'm wondering, why not apply this approach to a vehicle? A diesel/ electric hybrid with several small generators, rather than one larger one?

The idea is to take the parallel hybrid approach, with the generator sized just large enough to run the vehicle on the flats, then use battery power to provide boost for hills or passing. However, rather than a large battery bank, fit it with additional small generators. If the electric need hits a certain mark, it kicks in a second (and third?) generator. Each engine would be running at its optimized RPM 100% of the time, and the battery bank could be much smaller than a 'normal' hybrid, since the batteries would only really have to supply power until the additional generator(s) come(s) on-line (like the way a back-up AC power generator / UPS system works).

I guess you could do a hybridized hybrid where the main engine and electrical system are serial, but with additional generators that come on-line when needed. However, the main engine would, again, have to vary its RPM, so couldn't be optimized 100% of the time.

I know that some automakers are designing size-variable engines, where cylinders can be 'shut off' when not needed (i.e. a V8 where two cylinders can be shut off to make it a V6), but from what I understand that's only marginally efficient. I guess what I'm proposing is an electric vehicle with several smaller generators acting as one scalable generator.

And, of course, the smaller generators would be more efficient for camper needs when parked. For example, you could have one running when the batteries need charging, and then a second one kick in when you turn on the air conditioning, and a third when you fire up the welder.

Computer control would be necessary, and could also track and balance out the run times, such that one generator doesn't get a lot more hours than the others. Having sufficient rest time also prolongs the life of the generator, so you would want the controller to manage that, as well.

What do you think?
 
Last edited:

ntsqd

Heretic Car Camper
Goodness but that concept car has some serious scrub radius issues. Hub motors have one huge detraction, they are heavy & drive the unsprung mass unacceptably high.

haven said:
snipped......
I recently learned that a drive system that uses electric motors for motive power and an internal combustion engine to generate the needed electricity is called a "serial hybrid."
The other lay-out is referred to as a "Parallel Hybrid". I find both of these designations confusing. What is serial and what is parallel? One could make an argument to label either layout with either name.
I much prefer "Mechanically Coupled" or "Electrically Coupled" as they are far better descriptives.

That Oshkosh system doesn't seem very efficient. If the IC does make 400HP then a perfect generator would yield 298KW. So that system is giving up 98KW (131HP) to conversion losses? That's 32.75% of the total power produced.

Lynn said:
A related technology that I read about a few years ago is the integrated flywheel/starter/generator/motor that mounts in place of the traditional flywheel.
"ISG", Integrated Starter Generator. We'll start seeing these more often on new vehicles, even on non-hybrids.

Honda makes the daisy-chainable gensets.
 

Lynn

Expedition Leader
haven said:
the version shown has electric power only, good for about 16 miles of silent running.

It looks like a scout vehicle, but you sure couldn't scout very far. You could just about scout 8 miles with a good pair of binoculars!

I know, it's just a concept, but 16 miles??
 

Photog

Explorer
ntsqd said:
That Oshkosh system doesn't seem very efficient. If the IC does make 400HP then a perfect generator would yield 298KW. So that system is giving up 98KW (131HP) to conversion losses? That's 32.75% of the total power produced.

Is it possible that the 400HP rating is max power at WOT? If that is the case, the engine is probably more fuel efficient at 70% power or 200kW. Possibly. :eek:

I know the manufacturers tell us our vehicles have XXX horsepower at XXXX RPM. That is at Wide Open Throttle (WOT), and only at that narrow RPM range. Most of us don't do any sustained driving in that range. Most of us rarely get to that point when we get frisky with the skinny peddle. I'm always more interested in the max torque, and what RPM that shows up. Lower RPM the better.:safari-rig:

And I totally agree about the unsprung mass issue and wheel motors. Yuck.
 

ntsqd

Heretic Car Camper
It probably is the peak at WOT, but in that type of application (effectively stationary) it would be ideally run at it's peak torque rpm for best BSFC. Given the typical flat as Nebraska torque curve of a large diesel engine the power output should be pretty linear to engine speed. Which would need a wide power band to effect a 50% change in power vs. engine speed.

All of which means that someone picked relavent numbers that sounded good without understanding which were the important numbers and their relevance to each other was.
 

Photog

Explorer
ntsqd said:
It probably is the peak at WOT, but in that type of application (effectively stationary) it would be ideally run at it's peak torque rpm for best BSFC. Given the typical flat as Nebraska torque curve of a large diesel engine the power output should be pretty linear to engine speed. Which would need a wide power band to effect a 50% change in power vs. engine speed.

All of which means that someone picked relavent numbers that sounded good without understanding which were the important numbers and their relevance to each other was.

There is a lot that can be said about diesel engine power curves; but this link covers most of it pretty well. Considering the fuel consumption curve, relative to the max HP point, I woud say 50%-70% looks like a good range to make electricity, on a continuous basis. Although the engine could probably run at 95% all day long, it looks like they didn't design in any excess power, other than the capacitors.

If I am missing something, please let me know, as diesel power is still a bit foreign to me.
 
Last edited:

lowenbrau

Explorer
Are they really using those spindly little heim joints to suspend the motors? Surely Raytheon would have researched off road vehicles a bit to learn that heims don't work well off road.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
189,137
Messages
2,913,399
Members
231,813
Latest member
Kc_trailhawk
Top