Option for a second hybrid battery

[Delzona]

Certainly not an idea I originated. Something similar is being invested in in Si Valley: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a35717014/ample-battery-swapping-station/

Damn! That's just what I was thinking about! I guess I don't need to post my idea to the Patent Office now!

Sponsored

 

[BMCGC]

I always wondered why all four wheels are not also alternators that generate power to extend an EV's range.

It seems that the hub could be an alternator that the wheel bolts to and when the car is moving it is generating electricity. Wouldn't that solve the loss in friction problem that a belt driven alternator has?

 

[Darnon]

I always wondered why all four wheels are not also alternators that generate power to extend an EV's range.

It seems that the hub could be an alternator that the wheel bolts to and when the car is moving it is generating electricity. Wouldn't that solve the loss in friction problem that a belt driven alternator has?

EVs already have 2-3 motors that are perfectly capable of generating power via regenerative braking, but they mount them inboard with CVs since otherwise you're adding all that as unsprung mass at the knuckles. And they're internally geared, no belts. Even most serious hybrids aren't transmitting power via belt.

 

[Fotomoto]

I always wondered why all four wheels are not also alternators that generate power to extend an EV's range.

It seems that the hub could be an alternator that the wheel bolts to and when the car is moving it is generating electricity. Wouldn't that solve the loss in friction problem that a belt driven alternator has?

I think you're asking the equivalent of why isn't it better to drive with both the gas and the brakes on at the same time.

Hub motors have a huge issue (pun intended) with being extra unsuspended/unsupported weight on the wheel. What does that mean? Less is better. Think of this analogy: equally fast runners in a race but one is wearing knee-high steel toed boots vs track shoes. Who do you think is going to win?

Hub motors have their place in vehicles where suspension action/quality isn't a big issue: delivery vehicles, carts, robotics, drones, etc.

 

[DryHeat]

It seems that the hub could be an alternator that the wheel bolts to and when the car is moving it is generating electricity.

I'm not sure exactly what you are suggesting, but if you mean they should have generators running all the time to generate essentially "free" electricity... well, you're missing part of the energy cycle.

A generator running like that acts as a brake (as in "regenerative braking"). So to overcome the braking you have to add more power to the system through the ICE or electric motor. That means the power to turn the generator comes from whatever your driving power source is.

If everything were 100% efficient this would do no harm, but it wouldn't do any good. You'd have to put in X amount of extra energy to get X amount of energy back out.

But nothing is even near 100% efficient. So you use up X amount of energy to get back something considerably less than X. Perpetual motion machines just don't work.

 

[Darksider]

So bed full of batteries? Like 500 pounds worth, obviously in parallel to existing battery.. guessing the system wouldnt have enough brake regen to even get anything back out of a pack this big, or does the gas motor also charge the battery?

 

[MakinDoForNow]

Yup, although that's still not all that much battery. The current is a meager 1.1KWH, if you double it that's 2.2KWH so still nothing compared to the 14.4KWH battery in the plugin Escape, which would be adding 12 more of that size battery pack around the vehicle, lol! And even that comparatively huge 14.4KWH battery only gives the Escape Plugin a 30mile electric range, so imagine how useless an EV range a 2.2KWH battery would provide. Not really worth plugging in.

So it may not be a plugin at all, it may just be for a slightly higher performance regular hybrid AWD version. The current 190hp power figure doesn't make sense considering how much horsepower the electric motor is rated for, unless of course the power the electric motor can generate is limited by the current the tiny hybrid battery can provide.

Doubling the tiny battery wouldn't give you any plugin range really to be worthwhile, but it could allow higher currents so that it might be a 225hp AWD hybrid instead. I'd actually prefer that, because if you put heavy batteries on a Maverick chassis, you're decreasing its payload, all else equal. I rather it remain light and just have more power and on-demand AWD.

I believe the second battery place is reserved for the battery to power the drive motor for the rear wheels. Rear wheel braking would recharge the second battery which most certainly would be in parallel and of same size. The 2.2 kw would allow better utilization of the ice, I believe, as running less often and for longer to bring the HV batteries to 70%(?) with the 30%(?) being reserved for regeneration storage. I suspect that the AWD on the hybrid was constrained because expected low demand did not warrant the minimum quantities required for economic production as well as availability of certain items. Also I will have dealer change the lube/cooling oil in the transaxle at least at recommended frequency or 50k miles whichever comes first.

 

[MakinDoForNow]

Interesting article at cleantechnica, thanks. I remember watching a video where the chief engineer, when asked outright about further electrification, hinted at the future capabilities that the platform might enable. Battery tech is evolving reasonably quickly, so maybe he was just being coy to cover his bases. Or maybe they originally planned for two small regen batteries, but cut the second one to save money. Hard to know with so little info.

I guess time will tell, but I do expect that Ford will release a more-electrified version of the Maverick at some point, although maybe it’ll be a bigger redesign than the engineer seemed to tease.

I would love to see a PHEV version with a 60-mile all-electric range. Most people don’t need more for daily trips, so Ford could save a lot of money on a smaller battery. And gas is a more flexible option for long trips into less-populated areas, making for easy weekend getaways. I have a short-range EV for daily driving, and an ICE for longer trips. It would be awesome to combine the two, and a PHEV Maverick would be a great way to do it.

I would gladly give up 6" of bed depth to phev battery.

 

[MakinDoForNow]

Thanks. A guy can dream right?

Why doesn't Elon Musk solve that one instead of wasting money on a rocket ship? Just sayin'

Why go down when you can go UP!

 

[Darnon]

The AWD on the Escape Hybrid is mechanical. There isn't an additional electric motor in the rear like a RAV4 uses.

Batteries is only one part of the equation. The inverter and electric motors are sized to make use of that capacity, but aren't large enough for full-time use like a PHEV. So if you add 500 lbs of batteries all you're doing is making those have to work harder and more likely transition to ICE. Also the regen capacity is limited so you're burning more energy into the friction brakes. The Maverick's battery size is probably defined by being able to share the same part as the Escape, but even there if Ford had felt 1.5kwh or 1.8kwh or more would have yielded better returns they likely would have used it from the start.

 

[MakinDoForNow]

The AWD on the Escape Hybrid is mechanical. There isn't an additional electric motor in the rear like a RAV4 uses.

Batteries is only one part of the equation. The inverter and electric motors are sized to make use of that capacity, but aren't large enough for full-time use like a PHEV. So if you add 500 lbs of batteries all you're doing is making those have to work harder and more likely transition to ICE. Also the regen capacity is limited so you're burning more energy into the friction brakes. The Maverick's battery size is probably defined by being able to share the same part as the Escape, but even there if Ford had felt 1.5kwh or 1.8kwh or more would have yielded better returns they likely would have used it from the start.

The 1.1kwh liquid temperature controlled battery will accept more charge than the 1.5 kWh air TCB and support faster charge/discharge rates because operating temp can be safely held closer to the self destruct temperature. With a liquid TCB 2.2 kwh mpg certainly could be increased but at what price per additional mpg using constrained items?

 

[Darnon]

The 1.1kwh liquid temperature controlled battery will accept more charge than the 1.5 kWh air TCB and support faster charge/discharge rates because operating temp can be safely held closer to the self destruct temperature. With a liquid TCB 2.2 kwh mpg certainly could be increased but at what price per additional mpg using constrained items?

The Escape Hybrid uses a liquid cooled battery as well and was designed with the 1.1kwh capacity before the recent years' production limitations.

 

[MakinDoForNow]

The Escape Hybrid uses a liquid cooled battery as well and was designed with the 1.1kwh capacity before the recent years' production limitations.

Yes I know They both use same battery. I do not know is if they both use the same drive motor but at some point Ford made changes to the drive motor. From what I have read they changed the windings less (15-20%) copper and (thinner &/or fewer?) permanent magnets along with changing the number of teeth on at least two of the gears in the transsxle increasing the rpm of the drive motor (sorry I don't remember exactly) by 2,000(+/-?) rpm at 65mph. This allows the drive motor to operate at the same current levels before the changes deemed necessary maybe because of magnet availabity or (?). I believe, since I read where the armature in the drive motor can turn as fast as 18k that this most likely is the main reason the max recommended FLAT TOW speed is lower than what some would like.

 

[MakinDoForNow]

The

So bed full of batteries? Like 500 pounds worth, obviously in parallel to existing battery.. guessing the system wouldnt have enough brake regen to even get anything back out of a pack this big, or does the gas motor also charge the battery?

Motor does charge the battery running at the most economic rpm with any excess torque being used to take the load off the electric drive motor (more overall efficiency than running ice at lower rpm just to charge battery). It is a balancing act. I speculate that the on/off cycling of the ice would be between different set points probably keeping the on occuring at the same voltage level guessing (30%?) and ice off at say (40%?) Or less whatever it takes to keep the thermostat on the starter/generator's stator happy (do not want to melt the windings). Then the ice could shut down unless the state of the battery still required charging in which case the load on the starter/generator could just be reduced. With all the cooling possibilities in this thing, I do not envision this actually happening. I do not know but expect the ice to cycle on/off occasionally just to keep some thermostats happy and to be ready to efficiently fire up. Gotta be ready to jump if some dude floors it. Bottom line is the second battery will give me more battery miles from plug in charge before I have to burn gas.

 

[James L. Harrison]

I would assume since the Escape, Fusion and C-Max have PHEV that the Maverick will get it too, this is why I'm leasing this Maverick, I'm sure in three years the PHEV will be out.

I recently read that you cannot lease the Ecoboost Maverick. Is this true, or false???

Sponsored