You have you proverbial "science project," and then you have literal science projects like this.

They show the extreme; Volt shows what is possible with a federally certified modern passenger car. What more could be done if there were a will to make it so?


By Sarah Shelton

​

With the annual 24 Hours of Le Mans getting the green light last weekend, millions of viewers around the world turned their attention to this iconic track in France.

But recently the Circuit de la Sarthe race track was the setting for a different type of vehicle when Shell brought its Eco-marathon prototypes to show what they can do.

The Eco-marathon contest brings together teams of high school and college students from around the world, which are challenged to design and build a "hyper-efficient vehicle." They can power these using gasoline, diesel, ethanol E100, battery, hydrogen fuel cell and (for the first time) compressed natural gas. After assembling the vehicle, the engineering students hit the track to test their design.

These experiments are not meant to become future production vehicles. Rather, the challenge focuses on finding new ways to push the efficiency envelope, incorporating cutting edge technologies like 3D-printing along the way.

​

And while this year marked the 30th anniversary for Eco-marathon Europe, but the race is hardly rote. Each year sees new innovations emerge and new records set, and 2015 was no different.

"In 1985 the winning vehicle would have been efficient enough to travel from Rotterdam to London on just one liter of fuel," said Shell.

"Now, 30 years later, team Microjoule-La Joliverie could travel from Rotterdam to Moscow on the same quantity of fuel with their 2,551.8 kilometers/liter [6,002 mpg] performance in the Prototype CNG category which was the most efficient result of the competition this year."

Event organizers said that three track records were set during the 2015 competition:

"In the Prototype category, team TED of France achieved 2,308.3 km/l [5,430 mpg] with gasoline and team IUT GMP Valenciennes set a new track record of 1323.1 km/l [3,112 mpg] with diesel," said Shell.

"In the UrbanConcept category, team Lycee Louis Delage of France achieved the best-ever performance and track record of 517.3 km/l [1,217 mpg] with gasoline, team DTU Roadrunners of Denmark achieved the best-ever performance and track record of 665 km/l [1,564 mpg] with ethanol."

Fuel economy ratings reaching beyond 6,000 mpg are mindboggling. But don't expect numbers like this to transfer to street cars. First of all, because these vehicles are purpose-built for efficiency, they are extremely lightweight. One team's car weighed only 104 pounds.

Beyond the driver's gear, safety equipment is limited to an emergency shut-off, a fire extinguisher and a roll cage. Safety standards required for street-use, such as air bags and antilock brakes, are absent.

SEE ALSO: Dutch Students Test Run Forze VI Hydrogen Racer – Video
Additionally, teams are given 39 minutes to cover 9.9 miles, and the average speed is only 15.5 mph. Fuel savings and distance are unmistakably emphasized over speed. To achieve the highest fuel consumption ratings possible, teams select fuel tanks (or battery stacks) just large enough to reach the end. Power units are similarly downsized to accentuate efficiency over power. (The full rules on how the Eco-marathon calculates fuel consumption ratings can be read here .)

Though it will be some time before fuel economy ratings even close to this are available for passenger cars, the achievements made during these Eco-marthons are certainly worth noting, and applauding.

 

Photo credit: Patrick Post/AP Images for Shell

 

You have you proverbial "science project," and then you have literal science projects like this.

They show the extreme; Volt shows what is possible with a federally certified modern passenger car. What more could be done if there were a will to make it so?


By Sarah Shelton

​

With the annual 24 Hours of Le Mans getting the green light last weekend, millions of viewers around the world turned their attention to this iconic track in France.

But recently the Circuit de la Sarthe race track was the setting for a different type of vehicle when Shell brought its Eco-marathon prototypes to show what they can do.

The Eco-marathon contest brings together teams of high school and college students from around the world, which are challenged to design and build a "hyper-efficient vehicle." They can power these using gasoline, diesel, ethanol E100, battery, hydrogen fuel cell and (for the first time) compressed natural gas. After assembling the vehicle, the engineering students hit the track to test their design.

These experiments are not meant to become future production vehicles. Rather, the challenge focuses on finding new ways to push the efficiency envelope, incorporating cutting edge technologies like 3D-printing along the way.

​

And while this year marked the 30th anniversary for Eco-marathon Europe, but the race is hardly rote. Each year sees new innovations emerge and new records set, and 2015 was no different.

"In 1985 the winning vehicle would have been efficient enough to travel from Rotterdam to London on just one liter of fuel," said Shell.

"Now, 30 years later, team Microjoule-La Joliverie could travel from Rotterdam to Moscow on the same quantity of fuel with their 2,551.8 kilometers/liter [6,002 mpg] performance in the Prototype CNG category which was the most efficient result of the competition this year."

Event organizers said that three track records were set during the 2015 competition:

"In the Prototype category, team TED of France achieved 2,308.3 km/l [5,430 mpg] with gasoline and team IUT GMP Valenciennes set a new track record of 1323.1 km/l [3,112 mpg] with diesel," said Shell.

"In the UrbanConcept category, team Lycee Louis Delage of France achieved the best-ever performance and track record of 517.3 km/l [1,217 mpg] with gasoline, team DTU Roadrunners of Denmark achieved the best-ever performance and track record of 665 km/l [1,564 mpg] with ethanol."

​

Fuel economy ratings reaching beyond 6,000 mpg are mindboggling. But don't expect numbers like this to transfer to street cars. First of all, because these vehicles are purpose-built for efficiency, they are extremely lightweight. One team's car weighed only 104 pounds.
Before this news, I honestly thought that students at Le Mans and similar educational institutions are constantly studying and do not have time for such projects. However, when I learned that they had successfully tested cars for the eco-marathon with such an impressive performance, my views changed. I just often found assignment help, used https://assignmentbro.com/ for this. It was too hard for me to study. I didn’t have time to party and I was looking for ways for someone to do my homework for me.
Beyond the driver's gear, safety equipment is limited to an emergency shut-off, a fire extinguisher and a roll cage. Safety standards required for street-use, such as air bags and antilock brakes, are absent.

Students are the future.

 

The Amazing Chevy Volt Extended Range Electric Vehicle-

Miles driven Vs gas/petrol used Via OnStar data, N. America:

8,013.93 MPG - Darth Volt

http://www.voltstats.net/Stats/Details/6288

-

7,499.81 MPG - Volt Face

http://www.voltstats.net/Stats/Details/6238

-

996.89 MPG - SNSh ELR

http://www.voltstats.net/ELR/Stats/Details/6276


Link Goes To Volt Stats Dot Net-

http://www.voltstats.net/

 

Reminds of the 1987 Sunraycer. However it did it w/out using a drop of liquid fuel, traveled almost 3 times as fast, and went almost 20 times as far.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunraycer

 

The cost of building an efficient vehicle must be taken into consideration when incorporating these advances into future automobile engineering. Saving fuel is an important goal. Lower manufacturing cost allows the vehicle to be purchased by the majority of buyers. Most critical is the saving of lives; safety must always be foremost in the design of all vehicles.

 

I think I'm going to be sick.
This is like the tobacco companies promoting a no smoking campaign.
Does anyone really believe it?

 

I guess the challenge makes it a worthwhile project (at least for the participants). But I see not new breakthrough technology. Not to mention totally impractical.

 

Competitions like this have outlived their usefulness, as they don't contribute to a more fuel-efficient regular cars. At best they are science projects that encourage kids to start a career in technology.

As for EVs, the true efficiency number is miles/kWh for the EPA cycle. These are the numbers:
1.4 M/kWh: Via truck EV (based on GM truck)
2.5 M/kWh: Prius Plug-in
2.6 M/kWh: Tesla model S
2.9 M/kWh: Chevy Volt
3.4 M/kWh: Nissan Leaf
3.5 M/kWh: BMW i3
14 M/kWh: Stella experimental 4-person EV

So it seems that we we make a practical and safe car and drive it at regular speeds, we are stuck at 3.5M/kWh, even when using the best carbon fibre and aluminium materials.

 

Patrick G ,

I think the Spark EV is better than the i3. Also, I get more than 2.9 M/kWh in my Volt most the time. (not so much in the winter).

 

Patrick G :
At best they are science projects that encourage kids to start a # in technology.


As for EVs, the true efficiency number is miles/kWh for the EPA cycle. These are thenumbers:
1.4 M/kWh: Via truck EV (based on GM truck)
2.5 M/kWh: Prius Plug-in
2.6 M/kWh: Tesla model S
2.9 M/kWh: Chevy Volt
3.4 M/kWh: Nissan Leaf
3.5 M/kWh: BMW i3
14 M/kWh: Stella experimental 4-person EV


So it seems that we we make a practical and safe car and drive it at regular speeds, we are stuck at 3.5M/kWh, even when using the best carbon fibre and aluminium materials.
#6

Nothing wrong with that.

 

Patrick G : At best they are science projects that encourage kids to start a career in technology.

#6

Nothing wrong with that.

Actually, I love these things. They illustrate my favorite maxims;

"Keep It Simple Stupid"

"Simplicate and add lightness"

"What ain't there don't give you no trouble"

 

kdawg :
Reminds of the 1987 Sunraycer.However it did it w/out using a drop of liquid fuel, traveled almost 3 times as fast, and went almost 20 times as far.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunraycer
#2

Totally cool. +1

Great for daytime travel in Western Australia, but not so good when the sun doesn't shine. It needs a teeny weenie EREV system!

 

George S. Bower : This is like the tobacco companies promoting a no smoking campaign.
#4

LOL. +1

Are you old enough to remember the Mobilgas Economy Run? It was a pretty big deal in the '50s. I guess Mobil thought the better of it at some point.....................

 

Noel Park :
“What ain’t there don’t give you no trouble”
Very true Noel, but in this case you might need to add as long as you don't hit anything.

 

Eco_Turbo : Very true Noel, but in this case you might need to add as long as you don’t hit anything.
#12

As a lifelong motorcycle rider, I try not to stress about such things, LOL. And they're only going 15 mph..............................

And BTW, I forgot "Minimize frontal area and Cd"

 

kdawg : I think the Spark EV is better than the i3.
#7

I got my first close up look at an i3 the other day. Striking looking, but to my eye it didn't look like they had bent over backwards to optimize the Cd. Does anyone know what it is? Of the course the Spark probably isn't that great either, come to think of it.

Edit: OK, looked it up. 0.29. I dunno how. I guess, as always, it just depends on whose wind tunnel you use, LOL.

But they say it weighs 2635#. Now THAT'S impressive, if true.

 

One of the biggest things that could transfer to street cars is what passes for acceptable looks. Cars could be more aerodynamic with that teardrop nose/way-out shape (which is likely to be rejected by most buyers today). That's where events like this can help, more than tests of actual engineering.

As for other things, subtracting weight with advanced materials and more efficient batteries/power train are inevitable. I'm not that worried about the lower weight, as long as it can avoid being blown all over the road by crosswinds.

Much perception about the safety of greater mass (SUVs) is actually false; especially if the new materials (carbon fiber?) are stronger. Consider a contest between car and loaded semi: A car of moderate mass tries to stay in one place long enough to be crushed; while a properly designed micro-light might only be 'kicked' like a football (with airbags, this might be more survivable).

I believe I've heard that actual statistics bear me out on the supposed advantage of extra mass, but if I'm full of it, consider filling some of that extra aero shape with partially inflated bladders which would distort (and burst in a controlled fashion) without heavy, traditional crush structure. Or even, external airbags which would deploy to protect most of the car!

 

Noel Park ,


Hey Noel check out this link, http://news.mongabay.com/2005/0710-DaimlerChrysler.html
From the research Mercedes did emulating the Box Fish they could have done much better on the drag coefficient.

 

Patrick G ,

If you don't include recharging inefficiencies (which are included in EPA figures I get between 3.8 and 5.4 miles/kwh in my Volt.

 

The SAE has sponsored a similar competitive event called the Supermileage Challenge since 1980. Not to brag, but my company co-sponsored the 2001 winning team, as they were from our local 4-year university, Chico State, and one of the team was working for us as an engineering intern. They had to use a standard Briggs and Stratton 3.5 HP engine, but could "modify" it.

The winning mpg then was 640 mpg. My, how things have changed.

 

Jackson : while a properly designed micro-light might only be ‘kicked’ like a football (with airbags, this might be more survivable).

Advertising for the Corbin Sparrow said it was like riding in a motorcycle helmet.

 

Historically, when you look at efficiency gains for cars, consumers have generally applied these gains to enable larger more powerful vehicles.

So in the end analysis, gas consumption tends to stay the same. In other words, increasing efficiency tends to be a losing proposition.

For example, look at how they're applying plug-in hybrids to German sports cars. The main function of the motor and battery is to provide extra power. The plug is basically an afterthought, since the added electric boost requires a fairly large battery anyway.

Instead of efficiency, we need to concentrate on replacing gasoline with alternatives. The Volt does this beautifully. Now we need larger, more powerful range extended EVs.

 

kdawg ,

BMW i3 is 3.7 miles/kWh
The Spark EV is 3.6 miles/kWh
BMW i3 REx is 3.4 is miles/kWh

All this data is from the EPA sticker and that is 'plug-to-wheel'. Which indeed proves that carbon fibre and aluminum is not a big factor in efficiency.

In my 2013 Volt I do ~45 miles on a charge in summer on my commute. That works out to ~3.5miles/kWh plug-to-wheel (~4.3 miles/kWh battery-to-wheel), so my commute drive is better than the EPA cycle. Winter is worse.

 

Dave G :
Instead of efficiency, we need to concentrate on replacing gasoline with alternatives.The Volt does this beautifully.Now we need larger, more powerful range extended EVs.

If the goal is political to reduce dependency on foreign oil, I do agree that we should go electric. But if the goal is operating cost or environmental load (CO2) efficiency does matter a lot.
The CO2 emissions of a gasoline powered 50MPG Prius and an electric powered 2.9M/kWh Volt are about the same in the USA. Operating cost difference at current gas and electric rates is about $25/month. By improving efficiency the EV will look a lot better in those comparisons.

 

Patrick G : All this data is from the EPA sticker and that is ‘plug-to-wheel’. Which indeed proves that carbon fibre and aluminum is not a big factor in efficiency.

I'd rather not consider plug to wheel when determining how efficient a drive-train is and aerodynamic/light a car's design is.

If we use Range/Capacity we get:

BMW i3 = 81miles/18.8kW = 4.309 miles per kWh.
Spark EV = 82miles/19kWh = 4.316 miles per kWh.

 

Patrick G : The CO2 emissions of a gasoline powered 50MPG Prius and an electric powered 2.9M/kWh Volt are about the same in the USA.

This has been debunked several times now. Getting old... Don't forget the costs (monetary & CO2) of protecting oil flow.