From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,sci.energy,rec.autos
Subject: Re: Flywheel batteries as EV power source
Date: 28 Dec 1992 21:00:31 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Dec23.154010.13703@fcom.cc.utah.edu>, bbarkey@lark.utah.edu (Brian Barkey) writes:
>>The flywheel will try to dissipate it's energy over a span of milliseconds.
>>
>I guess I missed the part about dissipating energy over ms. What's the 
>basis for this?

Observation of high-speed systems, consideration of the amount of stress the
flywheel would be under when it failed, etc.

>Also, sometimes in accidents the gasoline does mix sufficently well
>with the air to be a hazard (remember the Pinto?)

Can you cite a single accident involving a Pinto in which, say, a full two
gallons of gasoline vaporized and mixed with the atmosphere in the optimum
fuel/air ratio for an explosion?

I didn't think so.  Those nasty explosions involving damaged Pintos involved
the explosion of only a couple of teaspoons of gasoline.

Why don't people understand the amount of energy involved here, even to within
an order of magnitude (please note:  There are 768 teaspoons per gallon)?

>I'm certain that
>in a flywheel powered car there wil be accidents that will be explosive
>and many that are not.

If the flywheel fails, at speed, and the containment of for the flywheel is
light and compact enough to make it competitive with batteries, then you're
likely to be talking about an explosive failure.

>Isn't this a factor of the design? If the 
>flywheel power source is a viable and marketable option I'm certain
>that manufacturers in lawsuit happy countries like this would 
>make a couple of prototypes and run 'em into walls to see what happens.

That's the idea.  However, someone was claiming that this is "just around the
corner."  Turns out that the magazine article that spurred this discussion is
about some entrepreneurs who claim (though they haven't built anything yet)
that based on a "computer simulation" the product should have certain traits. 
They claim it will take two years to build a prototype.

>This technology is relatively new, gasoline powered cars have been 
>around for a century or so and there are still problems. 
>Maybe the flywheel isn't safe. Could it be used in a smaller capacity 
>to augment accelerations from braking energy? All of this discussion is
>conjecture, but aren't ideas wonderful to ponder?

The idea of using a flywheel as a load-averaging mechanism on an electric
vehicle powered by a constant-speed engine and a generator has been around for
quite some time, and looks like a much better application of the flywheel
technology to me.  Unfortunately, the ZEV law in California is likely to deny
such technology access to the largest market for automobiles in the country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.