3 ms·

FTA: "By means of a further developed motor controller, the battery can be charged efficiently with the brake energy. This works with high efficiency as with a

by steeve 9y ago

FTA: "By means of a further developed motor controller, the battery can be charged efficiently with the brake energy. This works with high efficiency as with a flywheel. For acceleration, energy is removed from the battery."

phreeza 9y ago
Interesting. I would have thought the battery is not the right place to store that energy, as it will be literally doing thousands of cycles per minute...
- seanp2k2 9y ago
  Yeah, sounds like a job for a capacitor. Still, you're going to have lots of losses vs just not using the extra energy in the first place. Why not do something like a swashplate ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swashplate_(aeronautics) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swashplate_(aeronautics) ) like helicopters? Instead of varying the speed of the blades, just vary the pitch of the blade during rotation. But then you've just invented the helicopter. Use counter-rotating blades if you really want to eliminate the tail boom, see https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/8642/how-can-a-helicopter-be-designed-without-a-tail-rotor https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/8642/how-can-a-... for some example prior art). My first thought when seeing this is also around the longevity of those poor bearings, given the eccentric load. I wonder how much this would benefit from a motor with many more poles (to control the rotational velocity to a finer degree) and the lightest props you could find (CF is already used extensively in RC help blades). I also wonder if it'd be possible to use a horizontally hinged blade which could shoot forward + rock backward in a controllable fashion to control how much lift you get during a particular phase of rotation. I'm sure this is not a new idea.
  - jasonwatkinspdx 9y ago
    The whole point is to avoid the complexity of swash plates and similar mechanisms. This is just two rigidly mounted motors with asymmetric props.
hliyan 9y ago
Isn't this a job for a mechanical system, like a rotor mounted off axis with a counterweight?
- Gracana 9y ago
  Now you have to move the counterweight in and out, which gives you the same problem.

by steeve 9y ago

phreeza 9y ago

Interesting. I would have thought the battery is not the right place to store that energy, as it will be literally doing thousands of cycles per minute...

seanp2k2 9y ago
Yeah, sounds like a job for a capacitor. Still, you're going to have lots of losses vs just not using the extra energy in the first place. Why not do something like a swashplate ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swashplate_(aeronautics) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swashplate_(aeronautics) ) like helicopters? Instead of varying the speed of the blades, just vary the pitch of the blade during rotation. But then you've just invented the helicopter. Use counter-rotating blades if you really want to eliminate the tail boom, see https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/8642/how-can-a-helicopter-be-designed-without-a-tail-rotor https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/8642/how-can-a-... for some example prior art). My first thought when seeing this is also around the longevity of those poor bearings, given the eccentric load. I wonder how much this would benefit from a motor with many more poles (to control the rotational velocity to a finer degree) and the lightest props you could find (CF is already used extensively in RC help blades). I also wonder if it'd be possible to use a horizontally hinged blade which could shoot forward + rock backward in a controllable fashion to control how much lift you get during a particular phase of rotation. I'm sure this is not a new idea.
- jasonwatkinspdx 9y ago
  The whole point is to avoid the complexity of swash plates and similar mechanisms. This is just two rigidly mounted motors with asymmetric props.

hliyan 9y ago

Isn't this a job for a mechanical system, like a rotor mounted off axis with a counterweight?

Gracana 9y ago
Now you have to move the counterweight in and out, which gives you the same problem.