autogyro's Transmission Concept

[autogyro]

AUTOGYRO you are clearly 'desparate to get you technology taken up by somebody... anybody.

I've already responded on an other thread that using multiple planetary sets, each with motors etc is covered by numeroius prior patents.

And in response to your comment that the Zeroshift Technology was a scam..... it was NOT!

The original 2004 technology used flexible arms fitted into slots in the top of each bullet. This was later replaced in 2006/2007 with the bullets fixed to the Underside of each Actuator ring.

The technology would work but suffers from some engineering issues which I pointed out to them in 2004. Namely forces acting against the bullets and their slide channels etc.

There was also no hope whatsoever that the ZSL technology could possibly reduce the size of the gearbox which was their original claims.

The problem with Zeroshift was that I showed them numerous layouts and mechanisms that would hae aload them to circumvent issues with their previous mechanisms. However it's clear that William Martin was obsessed with getting 'his' invention recognised. In this he failed from a Business objective and didn't recognise a Gift Horse when it was shown to him.

I am not desperate to do anything.
In fact Ian you have again underlined the reasons why I hate the bloody industry.
All trick shifts that retain a stepped layshaft geartrain are scams.
The need for a shift speed faster than the conventional baulk ring or dog ring system in a road car is a waste of effort.
It is the gearing that needs changing to meet todays demands for energy efficiency.
F1 is simply a marketing exercise living in its own regulated world completely remote from the real one.
Zeroshift was primarily a marketing operation selling snake oil.
The shift ideas covered by zeroshift and the others originate from just after WW2, I talked at length with Alec Stokes about them in the 70s. All the mechanism geometries mentioned were covered and some not yet even in the public sphere.
It is all ancient history Ian.
My system is well documented and has a paper trail going back 40 years.

[autogyro]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19402383#

http://formulaeholdings.com/index.php

The future is Electric Racing

The question now is, do electric cars benefit from a gearbox?

Of course it has been tried but not with any success as yet.

Anyone out there want to invest in an electric car development and a team?

[IanLep]

Autogyro in answer to your question re gearboxes and electric cars....

The answer is yes, Electric motors do indeed benefit from utilising a gearbox with between 2-4 ratios (depending on application).

The main issue is Optimum Torque versus Power curve. As everyone knows you need a great deal of torque when starting off (particularly on a hill start) whereas at say motorway speeds you need an effective 'overdrive' capability.

So an Electric vehicle needs a high-torque/low stall capability at starting speeds which is at odds with medium to high-speed requirements.

The minimum requirements for efficiency for the likes of the Tesla car is 2 gears; one for low-speed, high torque requirements then into higher gear for medium to high speed.

There is plenty of research that shows that an electric vehicle can gain 10%-15% or more efficiency using multi-ratio gearbox inline with Electric motor(s).

[autogyro]

I know Ian.
Unfortunately many in the electric vehicle field do not as yet see the need for a gearbox.
Hewland did and it is why they designed a two speed gearbox for the formulec Merc/Petronas car for Formula E.
Formula E used the formulec to establish the recently released regulations for 2014 and the car was based on the suggestions I placed before the FIA in 2010.
Hewland also consulted me on the need for a gearbox gearbox along with ideas from my ESERU.
Tesla tried a gearbox originaly in their road car but their unit only lasted for 2000 miles so it was removed.
Conventional geartrains are not suitable for the flat torque curve of an electric prime mover.

I know of Porshe road electric conversions that have destroyed the gearbox in less than 500 miles when the motor simply replaces the ICE.
Layshaft, whether dual clutch/shaft, bells whistles or what ever just doesnt cut it far to ancient.

[autogyro]

Of course my ESERU is ideal for Formula E but I cannot self promote on that thread they will ban me.
I have a major single seater manufacturer very interested in building championship winning cars with me.
All I need is the F1 level of budget needed.
I badly need a marketing guru of the top level, the technology is not a problem.
Dont get me wrong I am not bothered one way or the other being retired.
It will be a shame if the project does not happen though.

[Richard]

Conventional geartrains are not suitable for the flat torque curve of an electric prime mover.

Hi Auto, can you expand on this please? What are the specific transmissions issues arising from a flat torque compared to IC torque?

[autogyro]

Conventional geartrains are not suitable for the flat torque curve of an electric prime mover.

Hi Auto, can you expand on this please? What are the specific transmissions issues arising from a flat torque compared to IC torque?

http://www.zeroshift.com/pdf/Zeroshift% ... ssions.pdf

Above is a presentation PDF from your friends and mine 'zerothingy'.

They took their thinking directly from certain 'autogyro' talks with others.

They are very close with the 'sweet spot' but no cigar.
Of course this is a conventional layshaft geartrain and has no chance of reliability or a decent working life in anything other than an electric bicycle, where it would be way to heavy.

Plenty of manufacturers trying multi speed gearboxes in EVs Richard check it out.
They finaly listened to my argument against the electric geeks and their continual anti gearbox stance.
All they need now is the 'right' gearbox.
Marketing bumf again, wish I had the guy they use.

Sorry but I am not prepared to give away the answers to improved EV performance Richard.
You will have to join the que.

[Edis]

Mod edit - moved from Volvo KERS thread ...

________________________

In F1 the motorgenerator is placed in front of the engine due to a desire to keep the weight as far forward as possible. From and efficiency standpoint, it matters very little where you take the power from the drivetrain but from a packaging and weight standpoint, taking the power directly from the engine is clearly the best option.

Not if the motorgenerator is also the gearbox.

Such a configuration would be very heavy compared to a regular gearbox, and would be less efficient.

[autogyro]

Not if the motorgenerator is also the gearbox.

Such a configuration would be very heavy compared to a regular gearbox, and would be less efficient.

That depends on what type of gearbox is used.



The ESERU shown is a seven stepped ratio gearbox with electric reverse for the current regs.
For 2014 on it would be eight speed with an added epicyclic.
All shifts use electromagnetic overlap which gives a fully controllable constantly variable shift up or down, with no reduction in torque transfer and complete control of the torque during the shifts.
This allows complete balance with ER-H through the ER-H M/G control and ensures complete control over the turbine boost requirements
Energy recovery from, or the application of electric power to the geartrain can be accomplished at any time under full control.
In top gear, eighth, the gears in the epicyclics do not turn in mesh at all and there is zero torque loss from them.
Lubrication and cooling is only required for the planetaries when they are in use for a particular in gear, there is no need for lubrication or cooling when top gear is engaged.
The whole geartrain is supported by the engine crankshaft at one end and one bearing at the other.
This bearing could be electro magnetic, the torque loss in top gear would then be almost zero.

[autogyro]

Thanks to Tomba and Richard for allowing me to post again.

In answer to some of your questions on EV gearboxes Richard.
The formula E box is a zero shift type box made by Hewland.
Listen to the sledge hammer shifts it makes caused by the flat torque curve and the inability to control the mechanical shifts with the powertrain input from an electric motor.
The Drayson LSR and ELM cars etc all have a similar shift.
A bit like coupling a flying saucer to a steam beam engine.

The answer is to forget the high tech electric MGs produced by companies like Siemens in Germany etc and develop an electric MG that is also a gearbox using induction for control instead of hydro, pneumatic or mechanical.

[WhiteBlue]

The answer is to forget the high tech electric MGs produced by companies like Siemens in Germany etc and develop an electric MG that is also a gearbox using induction for control instead of hydro, pneumatic or mechanical.

But the MGs in F1 are all induction controlled anyway, aren't they?

[autogyro]

But the MGs in F1 are all induction controlled anyway, aren't they?

The motor generators are but the gearboxes are not.
Currently they use a crude layshaft arrangement with a form of smoothed out dog engagement.
They achieve what I call a 'sledge hammer' shift and to do so they are forced to be 'sequential'.
Not what you want for an energy recovery system at all.
In fact the current gearboxes are the 'weak' point in the powertrain and prevent total control.

[autogyro]

http://www.f1technical.net/features/187 ... fd1880a912

Well worth a read along with the two previous F1 Tech articles on Kers.
If you compare all the technology covered you will see that my ESERU would be a much more sensible and road relevent development direction.
Unfortunately as is nearly always the case in F1, it is the regulations that prevent the ESERU from being used.

[wuzak]

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=405

So, a planetary type?

If you are using 8 planetary gear sets to achieve the 8 gears I would suggest that it will be a lot heavier than current gear boxes.

However, you shouldn't need 8 gear sets, because each planetary gear set should allow for 2 speeds.

But no, I don't see why this would be not allowed. The only thing that may scupper it is that the regs define a minimum distance between gear pair centres.

[autogyro]

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=405

So, a planetary type?

If you are using 8 planetary gear sets to achieve the 8 gears I would suggest that it will be a lot heavier than current gear boxes.

However, you shouldn't need 8 gear sets, because each planetary gear set should allow for 2 speeds.

But no, I don't see why this would be not allowed. The only thing that may scupper it is that the regs define a minimum distance between gear pair centres.

This is not just a multi stepped ratio gearbox Wuzak.
The annuli of each planetary set is also the armature of a multi segment electric motor/generator.
All the shifts are undertaken using induction energy to accelerate or slow to stationary each planetary set annulus and to unlock or lock the sets.
This is an ESERU an electric shift energy recovery unit.
It does not need a clutch for the ICE and it does not need any other gearing or electrical engines other than an electric storage and control unit.
As to weight.
ALL the planetary sets are locked in top direct drive with no torque loss at all because there is no movement between gears and the whole gear train revolves as one unit.
The planetary sets only operate when that gear is requested so there is little need for lubrication or cooling.
The whole gear train is supported directly by the ICE crank at one end and one bearing on the output.
In top gear there is no oil windage at all.

In neutral the first gear planetary is unlocked and un-powered electrically.
The gear mechanical output locker is in neutral.
Power is applied to the first gear annulus which rotates the ICE to start it.
Power is then taken off the first gear annulus and the gear train brought to stationary and the mechanical output engaged.
The first gear annulus rotates in the reverse direction in free wheel neutral with the ICE running..
Power is again applied to the first gear annulus and the car accelerates from stationary on electric power alone.
After inertia is established in a few seconds the first gear annulus is brought electrically to stationary and is locked to the casing .
The ICE can then drive through this first gear ratio.

Changing gear.
The first gear annulus is unlocked from the casing and brought up to the same rotational speed as its planetary set using electrical energy balanced to through torque from the ICE.
The first gear planetary is locked.
At the same time the second gear planetary is unlocked and the second gear annulus brought to stationary using electrical energy and balanced to through torque from the ICE.
All up shifts are undertaken using this method except top gear which simply locks the gear train as one unit.
Down shifts are a reverse sequence.
At any time electrical energy can be recovered from the gear sets either separately or together and energy can be applied to the power train.
There is NO torque loss during shifts which are constantly variable during the shift overlap.
The application of electrical energy to brake the annuli creates an equal and opposite reaction in the planetary which adds directly to motive force during the shift.

Because planetary sets have balanced burst loads and each planetary in this unit are only used for a limited period. the sets need only be 84 mm in diameter and have less gear width than conventional lay shaft gear sets.
The gearbox casing can be a far better balanced design.
There is also NO clutch which gives a completely new power train direction.
Integration with ERS-H is a simple matter.
This gear train would be fully controllable unlike the micky mouse shift systems used currently and there would be little need for fly by wire rear brakes or other technology destroying regulations forced by bad design planning..