TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain

[dwh]

Now let's talk about RCDON's GR-5A micro-turboshaft engine...



[AAAAAAARRRRRRGGHHHGHGHGHGHGHHGHGH!!!!! HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY does vBulletin drop my connection to the server when I try to preview a post? Why when I go back does it ALWAYS lose EVERYTHING I'VE WRITTEN SINCE THE LAST PREVIEW? WHY does it NOT auto-save like it's SUPPOSED TO? HATE@vBulletin! DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE!!!!!!!!! (Yes, I know I can cntl+a, cntl+c BEFORE I preview. But that's a bloody workaround and shouldn't be needed!)]

Ehem.

Okay, so where was I?

Oh...right.


So, a few points to ponder about the GR-5A...

He says it makes 8hp at 3600 rpm, but it'll go to 17,000 rpm and you can see he's set the tach to redline at around 15,000 rpm.

So...

17,000 rpm / 3600 rpm = 4.7
8hp x 4.7 = 37.6hp

He says it consumes 2.5 gallons of propane PER HORSEPOWER, PER HOUR (but he doesn't say at what RPM).

He's using it as a variable speed engine, mechanically direct driving the vehicle's drive train.

The 300cc Kubota diesel engine used in the NextGen and Fisher-Panda generators is a SEVEN HP engine, and can support a continuous load of 3.5 kva running at 2850 rpm in the NextGen, and 4 kva at 3600 rpm in the FP.

37.6hp / 7hp = 5.37


So the main thing to keep in mind, is that the GR-5A is MORE THEN FIVE TIMES BIGGER than what I had in mind. But since I had in mind using two for redundancy, let's say it's 2.5 times bigger.


Food for thought:

Altitude schmaltitude.

It uses a COTS (Hiya Suave!) turbo with oiling, so it's going to A) last forever and B) not give a crap about rough roads. Air bearings are a NON-ISSUE.

A smaller design, call it a GR-2.5A [Edit: Whoops. Should say GR-1.25a.] could be fit into the spaces between the wheels outside the frame in saddlebag configuration.

(I know biotect, that you like that space for storage, but you could use your pullout drawer in the front for a toolbox. With the turbines mounted down low on the sides, you can run your ducting up and down and back up again to the max height of the vehicle. Say the vehicle is 3.3m (per Steven Stewart), then you could have as much as (roughly) 10m of ducting to silence the little monsters. AND by putting them in soundproof AND watertight compartments, with snorkeling for the air, you don't have to pressurize the generator box the way Unicat does.)

You could easily build the GR-1.25A [Edit: Corrected.] to run on (yech) diesel. It WON'T wear out or break down or otherwise act flaky or have a shortened life from burning diesel. The turbo used in that design is FROM a bloody diesel in the first place, and the combustion chamber is certainly NOT going to care what it burns. Please, diesel+turbine=BAD is just not true. For SOME turbine designs, okay, sure - but certainly NOT for all turbine designs.

Also, (in a design to run on diesel) you can just run the fuel through a heater exchanger before it hits the engine. For startup, put an electric heating element in the fuel line. Once it's up and running, it'll keep running. Forget about Jet Fuel...don't need it.

I could see an oil cooler on the GR-5A, but I didn't see an *aftercooler*. (Not sure if it's possible with that sort of engine, but I think it should be.)

You could easily run the exhaust through a Thermo 90 heat exchanger (or a couple of them in series if need be).

Efficiency can be improved. You could simply line the outside of the exhaust system with Peltier Junctions or one of the newer thermo-electric materials. Not cheap of course, and not terribly efficient TODAY, but getting better. (Certainly allowable for a brainstorm thesis vehicle.) So that 70% heat/30% electricity ratio is NOT set in stone.



Now again, I'm talking about drive a little, charge a lot, and drive a little, process water into hydrogen a lot. I'm NOT talking about driving a giant vehicle 8 hours/day, day after day.

Also, everyone should keep in mind the main point of "range extender"; the vehicle is designed to drive MAINLY on battery power, NOT to drive MAINLY on the turbine electrical generation plant. In a "range extender", the generation plant is really nothing more than an "APU" for battery charging.

This is DIFFERENT than what those bus guys and Freightliner were shooting for. They were shooting for driving the vehicle MAINLY from the turbine power plant, in order to *hopefully* increase fuel economy.

 

[dwh]

I see he also built a bigger engine that uses diesel fuel:

http://www.rcdon.com/html/gr-7_turbojet_engine_project.html

 

[Haf-E]

A few quick comments and then I've got to run...

I agree that the purpose of this thread is open thinking of what could be - so I'll leave it at that.

Most turbines are not very efficient - they are preferred for their low maintenance, extremely long run time and simplicity. The fuel consumption figures for the ones linked here built around automotive turbines are very high - for the little one in the first link it used 2.5 gallons of propane per hour per horsepower. By comparison a 40kW Diesel generator uses typically about 4 gallons per hour at full output (40 kW or 54 HP) - and some of the better 20 kW generators drop that down to 1.6 gallons per hour (depending on brand etc.).

If an expo-bus type vehicle has a 100 kWH battery (the Tesla sedan has a 85 kWH battery) then it should be able to drive about 100 miles without charging depending on the speed, size and aerodynamics (the Tesla sedan goes 265 miles in EPA testing). So at an average of 50 mph that would be about 2 hours or travel. Going to a 200 kWH battery, then the range should be around 200 miles and 4 hours of driving - again without the generator running.

Now if a 40 kW generator was operated continuously while driving - the range would increase substantially. With a 100 kWH battery, at the end of 2 hours / 100 miles the battery would still have 80% of its capacity left - you could go about 10 hours or 500 miles before the battery was empty and then recharge the battery in about 3 hours. Actual range would depend on what else needs to be operated such as air conditioners, cooking etc while charging. Fuel consumption after 10 hours of driving would be 40 gallons for a distance of 500 miles = 12.5 mpg (although the actual number should include the additional generator run time to recharge the battery). The driver could decide what was required based on the distance involved and/or if the AC was required etc.

Since the only connections to the generator are fairly minor (fuel line, wiring, exhaust pipe) it could also be designed for servicing repair on a slide out arrangement perhaps to the side and it could be located somewhere else other than under the cab.

Using one motor per wheel always sounds attractive but in many ways one motor per axle makes more sense since it allows full power of the motor to be delivered to a single wheel via a differential lock. It is also a lot simpler. The central tube on the Tatra is a nice solution for an engine driven vehicle - but the ability and benefits of electric motors make the need for it less important. Using conventional solid axles with a motor per axle is probably more than sufficient for a 6x6 vehicle application. I'd opt for real portal axles for their higher gear ratio (electric motors like to spin fast) and greater clearance.

(BTW - I don't own a Tatra but do own the vehicle which was design by Hans Ledwinka's son under his guidance - the Steyr-Puch Haflinger and it has electric drive - currently being converter to lithium-ion batteries.)

 

[biotect]

.

Now let's talk about RCDON's GR-5A micro-turboshaft engine...


Altitude schmaltitude.

It uses a COTS (Hiya Suave!) turbo with oiling, so it's going to A) last forever and B) not give a crap about rough roads. Air bearings are a NON-ISSUE.

A smaller design, call it a GR-2.5A [Edit: Whoops. Should say GR-1.25a.] could be fit into the spaces between the wheels outside the frame in saddlebag configuration.

(I know biotect, that you like that space for storage, but you could use your pullout drawer in the front for a toolbox. With the turbines mounted down low on the sides, you can run your ducting up and down and back up again to the max height of the vehicle. Say the vehicle is 3.3m (per Steven Stewart), then you could have as much as (roughly) 10m of ducting to silence the little monsters. AND by putting them in soundproof AND watertight compartments, with snorkeling for the air, you don't have to pressurize the generator box the way Unicat does.)

You could easily build the GR-1.25A [ to run on (yech) diesel. It WON'T wear out or break down or otherwise act flaky or have a shortened life from burning diesel. The turbo used in that design is FROM a bloody diesel in the first place, and the combustion chamber is certainly NOT going to care what it burns.

Please, diesel+turbine=BAD is just not true. For SOME turbine designs, okay, sure - but certainly NOT for all turbine designs.

Also, (in a design to run on diesel) you can just run the fuel through a heater exchanger before it hits the engine. For startup, put an electric heating element in the fuel line. Once it's up and running, it'll keep running. Forget about Jet Fuel...don't need it.

I could see an oil cooler on the GR-5A, but I didn't see an *aftercooler*. (Not sure if it's possible with that sort of engine, but I think it should be.)

You could easily run the exhaust through a Thermo 90 heat exchanger (or a couple of them in series if need be).

Efficiency can be improved. You could simply line the outside of the exhaust system with Peltier Junctions or one of the newer thermo-electric materials. Not cheap of course, and not terribly efficient TODAY, but getting better. (Certainly allowable for a brainstorm thesis vehicle.) So that 70% heat/30% electricity ratio is NOT set in stone.

Now again, I'm talking about drive a little, charge a lot, and drive a little, process water into hydrogen a lot. I'm NOT talking about driving a giant vehicle 8 hours/day, day after day.

Also, everyone should keep in mind the main point of "range extender"; the vehicle is designed to drive MAINLY on battery power, NOT to drive MAINLY on the turbine electrical generation plant. In a "range extender", the generation plant is really nothing more than an "APU" for battery charging.

This is DIFFERENT than what those bus guys and Freightliner were shooting for. They were shooting for driving the vehicle MAINLY from the turbine power plant, in order to *hopefully* increase fuel economy.

I see he also built a bigger engine that uses diesel fuel:

http://www.rcdon.com/html/gr-7_turbojet_engine_project.html

Hi dwh,

Many thanks or these two posts. You've addressed the Air-bearings problem, you've addressed the multi-fuel issue, and you've addressed diesel. Simply terrific. This turbine is also turbo-charged, so altitude is no problem.

As you rightly point out, what I am designing is a concept vehicle for an MFA thesis at an Art College, and not a project for an MSc thesis in engineering. The primary purpose of my project is to demonstrate what might be possible in a RTW motorhome, given some imagination. As Haf-E suggests, some of the reasons why turbines are so attractive is because of their low-maintenance, their extremely long run times, and their comparative simplicity. Add to this multi-fuel capability, and a solution to the Air-bearings problem, and microturbines seem almost tailor-made for Expedition-vehicles, functioning as range-extenders in serial hybrid solutions.

However, I am still curious whether smaller, specifically multi-fuel, traditional rod-and-piston, turbocharged diesel engines also exist.....? If anyone reading this knows of some examples, please post.

As for the size of the microturbines, my inclinations are perhaps a bit different than yours.

In the New York pilot project that tested DesignLine buses, it was found that a single C30 Capstone microturbine was too small. DesignLine then tried to solve the problem by installing a second C30 Capstone microturbine in some of the buses. But notice that in the Peterbilt/Walmart/Great Dane concept truck, they decided to install a larger C65 Capstone turbine right from the start.

Furthermore, although agreed this vehicle might usually drive in short bursts, I can also imagine it needing to drive 10 - 14 hours on occasion. And it would be nice to have extreme range capability for other reasons. For instance, if only to reduce the need to refuel in Third-World locations where the fuel is not optimal. Sure, the central idea behind installing a robust multi-fuel turbine is to render a RTW motorhome "fuel flexible", just like the Abrams tank. But it might still be a good idea to have sufficient range capability, such that one could choose to tank up with better stuff that the one's satellite-Internet web-connection says is available another 500 km down the road.....

As for engine placement, I have to confess that I am still rather wedded to the idea of COE, with a front-sliding tray, as you first proposed. I think the ducts could still be configured to enter/exit just behind the cab, at roof height or just below, even with a COE configuration. I also like the idea of two microturbines (for redundancy) sitting side-by-side, and hence easily serviceable side-by-side.

I just came across an interesting Russian thread, which at one point seems to address the topic of "forward projecting" front windows:






See http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...;ика-1952-1974/page__st__80 .

On that same page, I came across this really great image of the back end of an old Hungarian "Pusher" bus, the Ikarus 55, opening very wide with huge clam-shell doors to provide rear engine-access:





This bus was produced in Hungary from 1952 to 1973 : see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_55 , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_55 , and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ikarus_55 :






**********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

**********************************







[video=youtube;wY81NcZKOYY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY81NcZKOYY [/video]


Of course, I am not imagining anything like this "protruding" up front. Quite the opposite.

Now that the microturbines could be located on a slide-out tray up front, I have no further interest in a CBE design. I'd like the front end of the TerraLiner to be every bit as "flat" as MAN-TGS or Mercedes Actros COE trucks. And ideally, it would enjoy just as much forward visibility + side visibility as a MAN-KAT A1, MAN SX-44, or a Rosenbauer Panther. Here it's worth repeating that egn, grizzlyj, and other experienced overlanders are dead set against CBE, and strongly favor COE. So too, Peter Thompson wrote to me that he much prefers COE in Mañana, because it enables him to "look over" the other side of a sand dune before committing his vehicle when crossing a dune crest. So although I played devil's advocate earlier in the thread in favor of CBE, I've long since been leaning in the direction of COE. I just couldn't figure out how to make it work, without engine-access inside the vehicle. But going serial hybrid solves all of this, because the diesel-fueled engine becomes a big generator, that can slide out on a tray.

Also, just to forestall any potential criticism, coming from who knows where (....?): yes, I know that the buses shown in the previous post with protruding windscreens are just transit buses, and that they have horrible approach angles. I posted them only because their windshields seem interesting, in so far as they seem to provide excellent forward and side visibility.

In short, just thought I should post this image of the huge clam-shell doors on the Ikarus 55, to suggest how additional front-end access could be provided in a COE design -- if the access doors were designed properly. as slightly more "wrap-around".


**********************************


So once again, dwh, many thanks for your two posts.

All best wishes,



Biotect

 

[biotect]

.
**********************************


1. Designing to Endear: the VW Microbus


**********************************


I also posted additional images of the Ikarus 55 above because it's just so darned beautiful and endearing. I love the sculpted styling of these old buses, how their body panels are complex curves, and how they communicate warmth and approachability, while remaining very elegant.

Perhaps one needs to do a bit of sculpture to realize this, but the curves below matter just as much as the curves up above. To give an abstract form a feeling of life-filled "presence", curves need to follow through underneath, creating a total organic unity, from top to bottom. This is something that the British sculptor Henry Moore understood very well -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Moore :





Without the undercuts at the base, these sculptures would completely fail to convince visually. They would not look organically "alive".

And it's the same with vehicles: cars and buses that do not have curved undercuts seem less "alive" than those that do.

This is probably something hardwired into our psychology by millions of years of evolution. The mammals that we lived with tended to be bulbous creatures with curved undercuts: think of the belly of a horse, or the belly of a cow. So when we see vehicles that look the same, our natural instinct is to anthropomorphize, imagining such vehicles as every bit as "alive" as the animals they resemble. If the rest of a vehicle's styling works to endear as well, then we will imagine it as warm and approachable. Unfortunately not all designers understand this basic truism of visual psychology.

This Ikarus 55 then calls to mind some of the earliest examples of the VW Type 2 Microbuses, i.e. those dating back to the 1950's -- see See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Type_2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Westfalia_Campers , http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Volkswagen_Type_2_campers , https://www.pinterest.com/lilredbeachhse/c-a-m-p-e-r-v-a-n-s/ , https://www.pinterest.com/anngaj/vw-camper-van/ , https://www.pinterest.com/mechantstudio/my-camper-vw/ , https://www.pinterest.com/vanessascarpin/i-love-kombi/ , https://www.pinterest.com/janronaldcrans/vw-vans/ , https://www.pinterest.com/heatherrsherman/vw-love/ , https://www.pinterest.com/sharonwashere/must-own-vw-van/ , https://www.pinterest.com/geertverheyen/vw-bus/ , and https://www.pinterest.com/mididen/vw-bus/ .

The world of VW Microbus destinations is a it confusing. The whole 63-year production run is known as "Type 2", to distinguish it from the VW Beetle car, which was "Type 1". But within the Type 2 designation for Microbuses, there are different models designated T1 through T5.

From the point of view of collectors, the most valuable would seem to be the very first "T1" models, produced from 1950 to 1967. Collectors love the T1's split-screen windshield, with forward-opening windows; the big cast-aluminum VW logo; and the two-color paint job. In the case of the "Samba" T1 variant specifically, collectors love the 8 skylight windows + sunroof, for a total of no less than 23 windows. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Samba , http://www.vwcampervandirectory.co.uk/vw-campervan-history/type-1-t1-vw-campervan/ , and http://www.vwcampervandirectory.co.uk/vw-campervan-history/ :





But for me, what impresses most in hindsight is the T1's organically unified shape, with curving body panels that undercut below, as per the Ikarus 55 or Henry Moore's sculpture. This was of course standard enough in buses at the time, and only seems pyschologically-intelligent in retrospect, because this is perhaps not so common in vehicles today.

I'd then wager that it's the overall "bulbous" or "blob-like" quality of the VW Microbus that accounts for at least 50 % of its perceived warmth and approachability. And the T1's organically unified shape was there right from the beginning, present in the very first models and prototypes:





For some very quick histories of the T1's early development, see http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/04/the-birth-of-the-vw-bus-from-first-sketch-to-production/ , http://www.vwbussale.com/2012/09/from-first-sketch-to-production.html?m=1 , and https://yeswecanjourney.wordpress.com/tag/birth-of-the-vw-bus/ . For a much longer and more comprehensive history translated from Spanish, packed with great imagery, see http://www.aqp-consultores.com/oldpartners/?p=466 , http://obeliscoclassiccarclub.blogspot.it/2014/04/historia-del-principio-y-el-fin-de-las.html , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...://www.aqp-consultores.com/oldpartners/?p=466 , and http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...4/historia-del-principio-y-el-fin-de-las.html . Also see http://www.newspatrasso.gr/volkswagen-type-1-type-2-t1-t2/ and http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...wspatrasso.gr/volkswagen-type-1-type-2-t1-t2/ . And for a nice blog-entry about the "Samba" specifically, see http://www.curbsideclassic.com/curb...ssic-1965-vw-deluxe-micro-bus-samba-tinnibus/ .

The T1 was originally marketed as a kind of super-sized station-wagon, and had removable passenger seats so that it could also function as a cargo van:






**********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

**********************************


From the Samba 1961 sales brochure -- see http://www.thesamba.com/vw/archives/lit/61buses.php :







Here are some images of vintage T1 Microbuses, beautifully maintained and/or restored:







**********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

**********************************


Volkswagen T1 Microbuses came in a variety of color combinations:





The most common color scheme seems to have been a color underneath, with white on top:






Another common color scheme was black on top and a color underneath, often combining reddish-brown with black, as per the first two images of the "Samba" already posted above.

But personally, I find it very visually interesting when the color combination is reversed, with white underneath and the color on top:





**********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

**********************************


Volkswagen T1 Microbuses also look terrific in “two tone” color schemes, with darker and lighter shades of the same color combined:





Personally, I also like the vintage-looking T1 Microbuses in solid colors, the ones that seem like they were amongst the very first produced. A few good examples of white-on-white were already posted above. Here is a T1 panel van in solid blue, followed by some more T1 Microbuses in black:







Now a bright color combined with white seems to most naturally "fit" the overall spirit of the T1's joyful, endearing design. And indeed, in the 1960's hippies took this to the extreme, painting their VW Microbuses a riot of psychedelic colors and patterns. But it's interesting that dark blue and black work beautifully, too.

And yet notice how even when painted solid black, T1 Microbuses still look approachable. Sure, they look over-the-top elegant and über-sophisticated. But their curved lines and overall "blob-like" organic shapes run contrary to the aggression and threat that a color like black usually signifies.

There are hundreds of excellent images of vintage VW "Kombis" and "Sambas" on the web. One just needs to know where to look. There's "Pinterest" of course, but that's obvious. On Flickr, the following photo-stream is packed with high-resolution, downloadable images of vintage Kombis, many of them with beautifully restored interiors -- see https://www.flickr.com/photos/kombibus/with/4175978303 and https://www.flickr.com/photos/kombibus/page1/ . Yahoo image-search is also good, just as long as one uses the right keywords -- see for instance http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...21+window+bus&ei=UTF-8&fr2=sb-top&imgsz=large , http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...+23+window+bus&ei=UTF-8&fr2=sa-gp&imgsz=large , http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...+bus&ei=UTF-8&y=Search&fr2=sb-top&imgsz=large , and http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...+bus&ei=UTF-8&y=Search&fr2=sb-top&imgsz=large .

The single biggest collection of VW Microbus images on the web is at http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/album.php . But many of these are detail photographs of mechanical parts, or photographs documenting restorations.


**********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

**********************************


2. Designing not to Endear: Some Critical Thoughts About the Morphology of Large Expedition Vehicles


**********************************


Earlier in the thread, Aspire wrote:

You want to build a huge MAN or Tatra, but you seem to look down on the FPBs and Unicat because they are luxurious on the inside and unassuming on the outside? Isn't a huge Tatra in itself like that, regardless of how you paint it, and are you saying that is a bad thing? Do you want flash on the outside too, or am I misunderstanding something?

Btw, the FPBs being unassuming, even looking a bit like military vessels is a by-product of them wanting their boats to be as free of varnishing and polishing as possible. Hence no wood and no paint on them - not even on the topsides. With that said, I like the resulting look.

Actually, I said nothing of the sort. In fact, I wrote that the FPB boats are "truly inspirational", and thanked Aspire for the link to the FPB website. See post #537, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page54 .

As for UniCats and Actionmobils, that's another matter. They do not just look "unassuming" on the outside. Rather, they look like garbage trucks instead of campers. And those who are not directly involved with the Expedition Vehicle sub-culture tend to think that they look quite ugly.

Moreover, many of them look rather "militaresque". They do not really look "unassuming", so much as they look positively threatening. They look like vehicles designed for what I call "Kombat Kamping". Because a highly masculine, militaresque external styling now seems the norm for many expedition vehicles, members of the expedition community often seem unable to perceive just how "shocking" some of these vehicles appear to outsiders. But in the wider world beyond the expedition community, most large expedition vehicles just do look like ugly garbage trucks at best, and as potentially dangerous troop carriers at worst.

When African villagers see such huge ugly trucks bearing down on them, they might be justifiably worried that these are troop carriers filled with soldiers, soldiers who will shortly kill all the men, and rape all the women. :Wow1: ...When instead middle-aged German couples emerge, waving hello, no doubt thousands of villagers across Africa have breathed sighs of relief……:wavey:

When traveling the world in a large expedition motorhome, presumably one does so as a civilian, and not as a military conqueror? And so presumably it might be best if one’s vehicle did not say,

“I am a rich imperialist here to ‘experientially’ conquer the Other, from the safety of my quasi-militaresque cocoon.”

Sure, locals might be more inclined to leave one alone, if the quasi-militaresque styling and khaki-green or military-grey paint of one's motorhome sends a message of "threat". But if that's true, then it has to be admitted that many large expedition motorhomes are simply not welcoming nor endearing. As such, their exteriors do not seem designed to promote “positive encounter with the locals”.

So one really needs to ask: Does one want to first frighten the locals with a visual display of brute force? With a vehicle that vaguely hints at the possibility of military violence?


**********************************


3. Designing with the VW Microbus in Mind


**********************************


For me personally, then, the design challenge seems to be to create a vehicle exterior that conveys a spirt of adventure and discovery, but without "Kombat Kamping" connotations. Later in the thread I'll post at length about the problem of "design morphology", and how vehicles communicate. For now, suffice it to say that my personal goal will be to create a vehicle that looks endearing on the outside, and yet elegant too. Not "glamorous" or "glitzy", but not butch-macho either. In the following video, Jay Leno makes an interesting comment about Jaguars: that they look both very masculine and very feminine, simultaneously --


[video=youtube;8asTbvGxqxE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8asTbvGxqxE [/video]


So my design goal will be to communicate something similar, something simultaneously masculine and feminine. (Note that in some versions, the CX-75 concept car was fitted with microturbines, made by Bladon -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_C-X75 and http://www.jaguar.co.uk/about-jaguar/concept-cars/cx75.html ).

So too, my goal will be to communicate something of the free-spirited 1960's "California surf culture" that the VW Microbus often calls to mind – see https://www.pinterest.com/LocalSurfShop/surf-vehicles/ , https://www.pinterest.com/kristinewoolf/i-love-beachy-vws/ , https://www.pinterest.com/Hapagirl23/surf-mobiles/ , http://www.behance.net/gallery/298928/Pacifico-VW-VIntage-Surf-Busses , and http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...p=surf+van&fr=&fr2=sb-top&ei=utf-8&n=60&x=wrt .

Furthermore, the VW Microbus has strong associations with 1960’s Hippie counter-culture, in both Europe and the United States. It conjures up images of the "Hippie trail" to India, riding a "Magic Bus" – see http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...s&fr=&fr2=sb-top&ei=utf-8&n=60&x=wrt&y=Search , https://www.pinterest.com/lemonlemonamy/painted-buses-painted-cars-painted-vans/ , https://www.pinterest.com/lantzpack/hippie-wanderlut/ , https://www.pinterest.com/stefunky8/hippie-cars-vans/ , and https://www.pinterest.com/ibjeepn/magic-bus/ .


**********************************


4. The Lovable Microbus that Carried the World's Ideals


**********************************


Volkswagen was thoroughly aware of the Microbus' iconic status. Or more precisely, it's advertising agency -- DDB, or "Doyle, Dane, Bernbach" -- was. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDB_Worldwide , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bernbach , and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Edwin_Doyle .

In the 1960's DDB ran the revolutionary "Think Small" ad campaign for Volkswagen, designed to emotionally cement product loyalty amongst customers who already owned VW beetles, as opposed to trying to capture interest amongst those previously unfamiliar with the product. It was also one of the first ad campaigns to use irony and self-depractating wit, as well as imagery deliberately designed to shock -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_advertising , http://the1955hudson.com/2011/09/27/classic-vw-beetle-ad-campaigns/ , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Small , http://books.google.com/books?id=Il5PAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y , http://www.randomhouse.com/book/201570/thinking-small-by-andrea-hiott , https://plus.google.com/+Losangeleswebdesign/posts/Fpv5YkyGEmZ , http://www.losangeleswebdesign.com/news/great-ad-series-lemon-ad-vw-circa-1960 , and http://www.adslogans.co.uk/site/pages/gallery/think-small.8462.php :





For how the VW ad campaign later developed, with some ads in color, see http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/all-the-great-1960s-volkswagen-ads#1b8thl9 , http://www.visualnews.com/2013/09/03/20-best-volkswagen-ads-1960s-campaign/ , http://www.eightyonedesign.co.uk/retro-vw-campervan-advert-designs/ , and http://www.vwcampervanblog.com/15-retro-vintage-volkswagen-camper-van-and-bus-adverts/ , and http://pictureorphoto.blogspot.com/2011/05/volkswagen-old-ads.html .

DDB's VW ad campaign is now considered the most important of the 1960's. Some even think it's the most important ad campaign of the century -- see http://www.hagerty.ca/articles-videos/Articles/2009/11/02/Watershed-VW-campaign-turns-50 , http://designshack.net/articles/gra...campaigns-of-all-time-volkswagen-think-small/ , http://silvercreativegroup.com/blog/throwback-thursday-influential-advertising/ , http://blog.asmartbear.com/breaking-the-rules.html , http://www.mikefeiman.com/2014/03/flashback-awesomeness-volkswagen-think-small-print-ad/ , http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/1999/11/15/smallb4.html , http://adage.com/article/special-re...advertising-century-top-100-campaigns/140918/ , http://adage.com/article/special-re...century-top-100-advertising-campaigns/140150/ , http://brandedcontent.adage.com/pdf/Andy_50.pdf , http://johnnylyle.co.uk/2011/04/16/vw-advertising-through-the-ages/ , and http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2011/august/happy-birthday-bill-bernbach . The ad campaigns of Apple Computers, for instance, are direct descendants of this 1960's DDB print campaign for VW.

Then in 2008, in retro homage to that 1960's campaign, DDB Paris created another ad campaign with formally identical posters, but copy that celebrates the VW Microbus turning 60 years old -- see http://adland.tv/ooh/volkswagen-van-60-years-old-retro-ad-campaign-nod-bernbach-print-france , http://www.adrants.com/2008/02/ddb-paris-adds-racy-political.php , http://adland.tv/ooh/volkswagen-van-60-years-old-retro-ad-campaign-nod-bernbach-print-france , http://charlesdaoud.com/blog/?p=209 , https://home.autonews.com/clickshar...ated-a-love-affair-between-volkswagen-and-the :






The copy on the last image above wonderfully sums up the cultural connotations of the VW Microbus:

It has carried all the world's ideals. The door must not have been shut right.

Imagine all the people holding hands, the liberation of our comrades, sexual liberation, the end of capitalism, of profit, of oppression, the ongoing struggle, a free Vietnam, free love, the smell of incense burning, the smell of bras burning, the smell of goat cheese and patchouli, Cuba s, nuclear no thanks, nan trugarez, nein danke, gurus, shamans, chakras, little red books, the road to Kathmandu, to Goa, the road again, Afghan jackets, Indian shirts, Swedish pretty hitchhikers, bell-bottoms, sheepskin vests.... When you realize everything the VW has lost on the way, you wonder how its reputation has made it intact.

The van is 60.

And the second-to-last image above sums up the VW Microbus even better. In effect, it says "No Kombat Kamping".

In sum, the VW Microbus was a “Hippie” vehicle for counter-cultural free spirits and surfer vagabonds, and something of that same spirit permeates all van conversions for expedition use.

One could then argue that the visual and cultural associations of the VW microbus are amongst the most benign of any automotive vehicle that is world-famous and iconic. Unlike many expedition vehicle types, the VW Microbus does not have a military or hunting pedigree. And more than most vehicles, the VW Microbus is thoroughly “lovable”, perhaps because its shape is so curvilinear and organic. Its front profile is also anthropomorphic, and looks like a human face:





It's not just the round headlights that look like eyes, or the V-shape in the centre that looks like a nose. The original T1's wrap-around bumper with secondary pipe also looked like a mouth. And when photographed from above, it looked like a mouth smiling. All of these endearing anthropomorphic design features were gradually lost as Volkswagen "updated" the T1, creating vehicles over subsequent decades that became ever more angular, rectilinear, bland, and lifeless, as it moved from T1 to T5 -- again, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Type_2 . The original VW Microbus was an innocent vehicle perhaps only possible in an innocent era. An era when it was OK for a minibus to look warm and friendly.

By way of contrast, even though Landrovers, G-wagens, and Landcruisers primarily signify “African adventure”, there was a time not too long ago when most Safaris entailed hunting and not just game-watching. To this day, Landrovers in particular are favored by the British hunting set. And needless to say, Landrovers and G-wagens are still widely used as military vehicles.


**********************************


5. Answering Aspire's Question


**********************************


In short, to rephrase Aspire's question:

"Will the exterior of the TerraLiner concept vehicle be a glitzy glamper that attracts attention? Or will it instead be an "unassuming" but militaresque vehicle that says "Beware: Kombat Kamping!"

The answer is: neither.

Instead, it will be a vehicle that clearly signals that's it a camper, and just a camper. Of course it will be much larger than a VW Microbus Camper. But as the images of the Ikarus 55 bus above suggest, there was a time when the VW Microbus did not look all that different from much larger buses. There was a time when larger vehicles could look endearing, too:





As for just the Tatra chassis itself communicating something, it seems that Aspire doesn't quite "get" it, and perhaps has not read the thread? If he had, he would have realized that a fully integrated design would not be just another Tatra conversion. Because the only thing taken over from Tatra would be the chassis frame, and not the Tatra cab. Sure, the huge Michelin tires are more or less unavoidable. But almost everything else about the exterior appearance is up for grabs, and could be orchestrated to create a vehicle much more endearing and less threatening than some of the more militaresque UniCats or Actionmobils.

The precedent here is obviously Mañana, which should also not be imagined as "just another a MAN conversion"...... The Australian company that built Mañana only began with a MAN chassis frame, because they ditched the cab. They then constructed a completely bespoke integrated camper on top of that, a camper that does not look even remotely like a utilitarian MAN truck -- again, see post #212 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22 . A camper that, indeed, looks like a fairly ordinary sort of RV.....

So think of the above gallery of images of VW Microbuses as a kind of "preliminary" answer to Aspire's question. I've been thinking about these issues of design language for months now, ever since I created the "Ethics of Third World Travel by Motorhome" thread -- see http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...Motorhome?highlight=ethics+third+world+travel . The VW Microbus has been very much on my mind, and I've wanted to write about it. Aspire's question then motivated this short sketch of some preliminary thoughts, thoughts written up elsewhere at greater length for academic purposes. More to come much later in the thread.

But right now back to microtrubines and serial hybrid solutions! :smiley_drive:

All best wishes,



Biotect

 

[dwh]

Only have a minute.

.And it would be nice to have extreme range capability for other reasons.

Well...if it can run on batteries and it has a solar array on the roof, then the range would technically be...unlimited. It would be painfully slow - a few miles a day maybe - but it would eventually get somewhere.



That one blue bus reminds me of Casa Azul:

 

[biotect]

.
Hi dwh,

Yes, Casa Azul is definitely one of the more "organic" Expedition motorhomes in circulation. It also has a very "Hippie" sort of interior, and seems designed in part as a watersports support vehicle. As a bit of a "surf camper". I have a huge collection of images of Casa Azul, because it's so inspiring. If I get some time next week, will post a gallery of images.

All best wishes,


Biotect

 

[thjakits]

WOW!!

Almost all info available on the net about EVERYTHING you can imagine in ONE thread!! Awesome!!

Okay - here is my little bit:
[Please keep in mind the following is just MY ramblings about things - like it or not - ........]

a) Turbines, Diesels, Hydrogen, etc...:

a1) Hydrogen will be pretty much useless, unless/until you get the according infrastructure in place. Making your own as you go?
Remember - nothing is perfect on this planet - every time you change the way/state of energy you LOSE! So, before using electricity to make hydrogen to run an engine (and possibly return to electricity....??) - ....better stick with electricity and improve on its storage.

a2) Turbines are simple - until you look at the details! In the last few posts we saw the turbocharger turbine contraption - horrendous fuel consumption!
Turbines can be very efficient - IF they are designed/adjusted to the intended purpose - but then they do become more and more finicky!
I remember from flying the old Alouette III: The operations manual said that on the particular turbine one can use pure GASOLINE for 10 hrs (...or was it 30?) in the lifetime of the turbine, Diesel could be used seemingly without limitation, but IF it was used as the primary fuel, adjustments to the fuel-delivery system had to be made - basically it was about fuel cost. Diesel is always tied to some road tax one way or the other. Jet-Fuel isn't/wasn't. Or Kerosene for agricultural use....
To "get my out of trouble" - ...just put in Diesel! (...it would have run on anything that burns - even Austrian STROH Rum, 80%) - then on the AS350B2 (NO gasoline at all anymore and only a few hours on Diesel - emergency only), then on the AS350B3 (NO fuel not explicitly authorized - NO Diesel ever!) - along these 3 samples fuel efficiency was increased substantially and power output too!

So talking about the turbine units mentioned in the heated debate further up - NO problem to use them IF, the manufacturer built them specifically for DIESEL!
As these are power units - they are designed to deliver a set power level and are optimized for most efficiency possible at this level with the chosen fuel.

Air bearings - about all small turbines use air bearings, does away with oil lubrication and it's problems - actually for a vehicle as proposed in this thread - air bearings would be preferable as you don't have to worry too much about the attitude of the turbine in any given position and the resulting oil pooling problems.
The perceived problems with bumps and jolts and other off-roading by-products, shouldn't be a problem. Normally the suspension will take care of these, or the vehicle would suffer damage just the same as the turbine....
[Turbulence in flight and hard landings with rigid landing gear deal out just as much stress on a helicopter turbine, maybe not as often]
In any case I think there would be more concern about gyroscopic precession and resulting bearing loads and shaft deflection - something the turbine maker certainly can address.
[E.g. the mentioned turbine in the Abrams tank is a derivative from a family that is also used in the air and on water and on stationary plants....]

Anything is possible - if you dream it up! For the sake of this discussion, you need to decide if you want to build your theoretical rig with "technology available now" - "....available in the near future" - "...available and PROVEN" - ....you see where this is going!!

I think - you would be better off (for the time being) to use a common diesel unit, that can be serviced about anywhere around the world - diesel-power units are adjusted/tuned to the same level as the turbine units - to run most efficiently on one setting and generate/charge at this level only - they are just heavier! Turbine technology doesn't scale down very well - at outputs much less than 150shp things start to become inefficient quickly compared to Diesel engines - the only advantage that remains is weight, which concerning the rigs we are talking about is not much of an argument anymore!

Diesel vs. Jet-Fuel (don't call it Kerosene, there is quite some difference there!): Jet-fuel as commonly used in aviation turbines contains very little lubricant. Diesel contains a LOT of lubricant (mainly for the injection pump system) - this alone requires specific adjustment for the combustion process.
[Google up a serious case of botched Diesel production in South Africa some time ago - Land Rover was going crazy with engine warranty claims! Culprit - batches of Diesel without the proper lubricant!! US Armed Forces had huge trouble in Irak with local Diesel, ...until the grunts decided to bring their own 2-stroke outboard oil quarts and add it to the fuel at 200ppm - problems gone away!)
You can make a Diesel run on Jet-Fuel, but it either takes adding your own lubrication or modifying/changing to a different injection pump.
[If you think CR-systems, think again - the injectors need lots of lubrication too!]



b) Hybrid Technology:

I very much like the idea - I am dreaming about building my own 2nd gen Hybrid Van myself (something like a Toyota Hi-Ace to start with) - I call 2nd gen what you call something like "inline/serial power drain" - no mechanical connection and drive from the ICE.

You probably have to read my point c) first to get the details, but as this thread is about RTWGAP vehicles, I assume that there is a good amount of driving involved. The question arises how efficient you can make the transformation of energy: fuel/IC/generator/electric-motor. In this specific case it might be more efficient to stick with the hybrid part being used to increase efficiency via downhill and braking power recovery, which certainly will need a smaller battery bank and maintain a mechanical drive from the engine....

At the present stage of battery and charging technology - I believe 2nd gen hybrids are still a little limited for everyday LONG distance/time driving. If you are into daily urban driving or like to go a shorter distance and hang out there (....and give your solar system time to recharge your monster battery bank) - you may be on to something) - E.g. "My" Toyota/Nissan/etc. Van-transformation would be planned for a hopefully 150-200km electric-drive (with A/C and lights) round-trip. A residence mounted Solar array-to battery bank-night transfer to van arrangement. The 120hp turbo diesel of the original would be replaced with a 30-50 hp smaller turbo-diesel-powerplant unit (something like a 3-cyl VW unit out of their smaller line up) - essentially a emergency unit, in case things got messed up on the daily run.
[The smaller engine would be rigged as a generator-power unit and charge the batteries and/or drive the e-motors, NO mechanical drive-train]



c) "Fully Integrated MAN or TATRA 6x6 or 8x8 Expedition RV" - I don't want to bust your whole idea/dream/exercise here, but I still want to address the common sense and real-life usability of the whole concept (Don't get me wrong, I love this kind of machine a lot, but does it really make sense at all?):

Somewhere in this thread Rob Gray's Wothahellizat was mentioned (or google it up!) - Definitely OLD style mechanical with excellent new-style/innovative living quarters! (Yes I know - lots of chassis twist and all!) As the machine is/was built - definitely capable of going about anywhere where it could fit.
Did Rob ever go to the very extreme end it was/is capable? No.

Somewhere in his chronicles he made the very important and serious point: If your ride (and in this case rolling home) is the ONLY ride you bring - you always will (...or at least SHOULD!) think twice before you risk going to a tough spot (despite the whole 4x4,6x6,8x8 or 10x10 prowess of your rig) and risk getting stuck!

With rigs this size -you still need serious man power for recovery and unless you take along your whole fire-department you might be stuck for good!
[Also - if you get stuck alone - WILL you have the surroundings provide your recovery points? All your winching gear is useless if you cannot reach that ONLY tree or rock 520.3 meters away....]

Remember, we are mainly talking about MILITARY vehicles that seem to be the basis for most of these rigs. MILITARY almost ALMOST never works alone!
They always have a recovery system nearby - mostly built on the same chassis! Trucks, tanks - check it out! Worst case - abandon the rig and hitch a ride with the rescue team!
Mostly NOT an option if you are stuck in the middle of nowhere - and possibly no one knowing where you are in the first place!

So - as Rob mostly (smartly) decided to do, DON'T go all the way, but hike and camp or get a smaller vehicle to play the shorter trips.
At the end - the most awesome capabilities of the Expedition Rig become useless, because risking to use them is risking to get stuck for real.

c1) All the mentioned base rigs have full AWD and full lockers all around. How about reducing all again to just ONE permanent drive-axle and get hydro-drives to the others (use when needed only! - despite ones ideas/dreams/fantasies - you still will spend MOST of the driving time on a some kind of road! Most roads are made so, that most of the time a a single axle drive truck can pass....)
.....and save a LOAD of weight in the process and gain a partial hybrid recovery system (albeit hydraulic)

Check out these (...and google for more!):

MAN hydrodrive
RENAULT optitruck
POCLAIN hydro drive

[MAN and RENAULT systems are derived from the Poclain system...]
...and by now Volvo and Mercedes seem to have something similar (As Volvo is the parent of Renault by now...)

It seems - at this time, hydraulic motors can still deliver more power/weight than e-motors........
You also can use this system for power recovery and storage (see Poclain's system....)

So - I believe, if you REALLY want to go to out-of-this-world-places you might want to think about a base-camp truck/bus and a trailer with something like a Puch Pinzgauer or Volvo C303/4/6 - or travel in groups of similar awesome-rigs!!


Not really that inovative, but my personal dream is to convert a US-derived schoolbus into a go-NEARLY-anywhere rig and tow something like a Volvo or even a Suzuki Jimny (depends how many we are in the bus!):

Big engine (for a schoolbus)
adapt a Ecosplit-16-manual
add a tag axle
adapt hydro-drive to the non-drive axles
roof-raise
slide outs
huge liquid storage
"Stay ON the road!" - but I want to be able to drive ANY road I fit - OFF the road with the "Little Explorer" only!!


Biotec - heated discussion aside (I know that these things carry a LOT of passion and many times it is hard to accept an error unless proven!! ...this is for anyone discussing here!) and depending on the scope of your graduation work - I think it is impossible to build the perfect rig for all and every situation!

You will have to design 3 rather very distinct categories:

1. Action every day - driving a lot - not staying on site for more than 2-3 days

2. Staying on site for prolonged time (weeks), but access to frequent visits to civilization (food, fuel)

3. Not much driving overall (doesn't mean you cannot drive a few thousand klicks in one go!) - long stays away from civilization (weeks to months)

For 1.+2. you still have/can split into permanent home or vacation only.
Number 3. kind of implies a permanent living arrangement.


Any of the above will have a different priority and resulting offroad-capability, energy production and storage, supplies, liquids, living quarters arrangement.....



'nough said.



thjakits

 

[biotect]

Hi thjaktis,

Great post, and packed with lots of interesting information and thoughts. As I wrote to you privately, I will need a bit of time to absorb this. It's 11 pm right now in Europa-land, and I'll need morning focus to work through the details of your post. But rest assured will respond at great length, with at least a dozen questions.....:sombrero: Great to have you participating in this thread.

All best wishes,



Biotect

 

[jbeem]

Enjoyed the thread

I have been reading your entire thread for the last week and have really enjoyed experiencing the thought processes of a designer. For several years now I have been dreaming of building a serial hybrid on a Tatra frame and hope one day to make the dream a reality. I wish I could add more to your thread, but you have pretty much covered all the things I've been thinking about and much more. Looking forward to the continued discussion.