From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: APUs
Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 01:38:13 -0400
Message-ID: <u4fd6215qm8u6phaiume23pl9s7c3adcg9@4ax.com>

Today I attended a driver hiring fair as part of my push into my new
career.  A couple dozen trucking companies were there bidding against
each other for our signatures on the dotted lines.  Gee, this is fun
:-)

All the companies had examples of their hardware on display.  I'm
quite surprised at the rapid adaptation of high technology.  At the
conference at the National Transportation Research Center that I
attended in Oak Ridge three years ago, several brandy-new technologies
were on display.  Now they've become ubiquitous.  Several items could
be of interest to RVers.

Three years ago US Xpress was leading the way with infrared night
vision in the truck cab.  This system involves an IR night vision
camera mounted above the cab body and a small B&W screen in the cab.
There is some magnification built into the camera.  The main benefit
is the ability to spot heat-emitting objects such as deer from a half
mile or more away AND the ability to see through fog.  Fog is
essentially transparent to IR light in this band.

That was three years ago.  Today, those cyclops eyes were on most of
the different company's trucks.

Another development is the Eaton/Vorad radar based collision system.
This system mounts a small patch antenna on the front of the vehicle
and a small display/warning  unit in the cab.  It interfaces with the
vehicle's CAN bus.  It gets the vehicle's speed from the CAN bus.
Based on the speed and the vehicle's weight (derived from coast-down
rate), the system computes how much collision margin exists and warns
the driver accordingly.

An optional extension of the Vorad system is called Adaptive Cruise.
This system takes the VORAD data and manipulates the vehicle's
throttle and Jake brake to maintain a constant distance between the
truck and the vehicle in front.  If a car cuts in close, the computer
lays on the Jake Brake to quickly slow the truck and re-establish the
designated distance.  Too bad it doesn't also lay on the horn!  This
is about as close to auto-pilot as a road-going vehicle is going to
get.

An additional option mounts a second patch antenna just behind the
passenger's door looking  back into the traditional blind spot.  A
second indicator warns of another driver cruising in the blind spot.
US Xpress has gone one step farther and mounted a little color camera
on the front fender looking back feeding a small flat panel screen on
the dashboard.

Three years ago US Xpress and Eaton displayed the prototype system at
the NTRC.  Now just about all the major fleets are using the system.
Amazing progress in just three years.

The adaptive cruise in particular would be wonderful on an RV.  The
drivers I talked to all loved it and said that it made stop-and-go
driving practically painless.

Another very interesting development is the APU or Aux Power Unit. The
semi-oriented APU is designed to eliminate idling for comfort heat or
AC.  Here are a couple of photos of a unit installed on a Kenworth
tractor:

http://www.johngsbbq.com/Neon_John_site/Generator/Generator_home.htm

This would be a slick alternative to the conventional generator and
roof-mounted ACs on an RV.  Particularly one that spends much time on
the road.

I first saw an APU at the MidSouth Trucking Show in Louisville, KY
about 3 years ago.  They are available as described on the above page
and with an optional line-operated hermetic compressor for shore power
operation.  Very slick.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: APUs
Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 23:49:40 -0400
Message-ID: <m5tf62he8cmfo1o3d8vdhehubnqcj28fc9@4ax.com>

On Sun, 14 May 2006 12:36:48 -0500, "RAM³"
<S31924.nospam@netscape.net> wrote:


>> Three years ago US Xpress was leading the way with infrared night
>> vision in the truck cab.  This system involves an IR night vision
>> camera mounted above the cab body and a small B&W screen in the cab.
>> There is some magnification built into the camera.  The main benefit
>> is the ability to spot heat-emitting objects such as deer from a half
>> mile or more away AND the ability to see through fog.  Fog is
>> essentially transparent to IR light in this band.
>>
>> That was three years ago.  Today, those cyclops eyes were on most of
>> the different company's trucks.
>
>Too bad they're not Standard Equipment on *all* new cars/trucks!

Cadillac has offered a version of this for several years.  It
apparently hasn't been very popular, judging solely by the lack of
availability in junkyard inventories.

If you want it as OEM equipment, better limber up that checkbook. True
FLIR-type thermal imaging hardware is frightfully expensive, primarily
because the best lens material is pure germanium that must be
optically flawless in the band of interest.

Industrial thermal imaging video cameras are just now bumping under
$10k and about 99% of that cost is still the lens.  Until and unless
someone like Schott or Corning figures out a glass formula that is
transparent to far infrared, I don't see that changing much.  The
Caddy system was/is quite limited mainly because of those pesky
germanium lenses. (From what I read, anyway.  I haven't had the
opportunity to lay eyes on a Caddy imager yet, though I keep trying.)

Note that this is fundamentally different from conventional night
vision, AKA "starlight" imagers.  Starlight imagers are not sensitive
to the far infrared emitted by objects at room temperature and just
above.  Thus, though a starlight imager might be able to see far
ahead, it would not be able to highlight warm objects such as deer and
dumbass pedestrians who dress in black and go for nighttime
strolls....

I recently purchased a Gen III starlight scope and uh, I now have a
whole new level of respect for those who drive war machines or fly
choppers at night.  The FLIR technology is soooo much nicer but soooo
much more expensive.

A $10k system that greatly improves a driver's performance in a $100k
truck probably make sense but I can't imagine many car buyers paying
that kind of money.

>> I first saw an APU at the MidSouth Trucking Show in Louisville, KY
>> about 3 years ago.  They are available as described on the above page
>> and with an optional line-operated hermetic compressor for shore power
>> operation.  Very slick.
>
>Having spent the night parked next to a truck with a running APU [Fargo,
>ND, -20F], I *can* say that APUs are *not* as quiet as an idling Honda
>EU1000. <G>

True, but then again, an idling EU isn't doing much heating.

It has always seemed strange to me to turn mechanical motion into
electricity, only to route it six or eight feet to the roof AC where
it is turned into mechanical motion again.  Both from a simplicity and
an efficiency perspective, directly driving the AC compressor from the
APU engine seems so much more sensible.  The trucking industry thinks
so too, apparently.

The APU makers quote some very impressive fuel economy figures,
particularly compared to RV generators.  With the DOT's insane new
Hours of Service rules, a solo driver could be planted in the sleeper
for 10 hours a day or more, the APU having to keep him comfortable the
whole time.  That's a lot of $3/gallon fuel!

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: APUs
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 00:13:58 -0400
Message-ID: <t8vf62pv04fumpgh3doduttp942rkrl4si@4ax.com>

On Sun, 14 May 2006 20:12:24 -0500, "El Alumbrado"
<el*alumbrado@yahoo.com> wrote:

><hchickpea@hotmail.com> wrote
>
>>>An optional extension of the Vorad system is called Adaptive Cruise.
>>
>> Kewl!  How soon until this trickles down to autos?
>
>The first car I bought with this feature was a 2001. Many "high end" cars
>now offer adaptive cruise control, either standard or as an option. Some
>even offer a "lane hold" feature that warns you if you wander out of your
>lane. Next step will be hooking the GPS, cruise control, and lane hold
>together to offer a true "highway autopilot".

Even DGPS is far from good enough for that, though the next generation
may be.  There are better ways to do that anyway.

>There's no reason, using
>currently existing technology, that I shouldn't be able to tell my car "stay
>on I-35 north until exit 368".

A couple of years ago I got a ride in a car operating on a closed
course in which the driver was there only for emergencies.  The car
guided itself around the course using optical guidance.  That is, a
control system that looked at and locked onto highway markings.  This
system worked quite well and handled most of the "emergencies" that
the test engineers threw at it, including center and shoulder lines
that disappeared or were painted incorrectly.

This system will likely never make it out of the OEM's lab if for no
other reason than it lulls the driver into such complacency that when
the knucklehead in the adjacent lane decides to do the "Malibu Fade
Away" (cutting from the left lane across 6 lanes of traffic to hit the
exit ramp), he's not alert and in tune to the immediate environment
enough to react fast enough.
>
>All the hand-wringing about "liability" is irrelavent. The driver is
>responsible for whatever the car does. If your cruise control drives into
>the back of a truck because you weren't paying atention, who gets the
>ticket? You or the guy that programmed the cruise control? (Hopefully a
>rhetorical question).

All the people and companies who have had the "Joint and Several
Liability" cob shoved up their *sses would probably disagree.  Not
about how it should be but about how it is.  I am still amazed that
adaptive cruise has made it to the marketplace, not because of the
technological challenge but the legal one.  Especially on Class 8
trucks.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: APUs
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 00:28:35 -0400
Message-ID: <820g62t84g92v9n5raeuack02oa0ftklri@4ax.com>

On Sun, 14 May 2006 18:40:47 -0600, nasty milo <nstymilo@yahoo.com>
wrote:

<hundreds of quoted lines snipped>

>A little help here John,
>What is VORAD?

A trademark?  An Acronym?  Dunno.  The system is a radar-based
collision avoidance system that warns the driver when he's too close
to another vehicle to be able to stop safely.

>What is CAN bus?

It's like DVD; it started out as an acronym but now designates a
technology.  Originally "Car Area Bus" a local area network for cars.
It's now being shoved into all sorts of non-car applications such as
in semi trucks so the "car" part isn't accurate anymore.  Anyway, it's
a method for various systems and parts on a vehicle to talk with each
other and with the outside world.

The goal is to have one or a few loops of wire running around the
vehicle with each device multi-dropped off the bus.  A CAN-enabled
brake light switch would put a message on the bus telling the
CAN-enabled tail lights to come on.  The idea is to get rid of as much
copper wiring as possible.

That sort of integration is still several years away but CANbus is now
being used by many cars and trucks to communicate among the major
systems (PCM, ABS, stability control, collision avoidance, the
diagnostic port, etc.).  As with most other modern technologies
dirt-cheap silicon is driving the roll-out.  It won't be long until
the silicon is cheap enough to put a chip in each lamp socket or even
in each lamp.

There is another technology that several trucking companies are
testing that involves similar technology.  It is known as terrain
adaptive power control among other names.  This system uses GPS and a
topo map database to control the maximum amount of power available
from a truck's engine, depending on where it is.  The idea behind this
is that better fuel economy and engine life can be achieved if the
power is limited to just what is necessary to get the job done.

I think that this is a great idea, at least until the companies try to
misuse it to control the driver's speed.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: Factory hitch vs. add on
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:36:20 -0400
Message-ID: <grolg2pg6qjvads1ba9l048h94oub9hel9@4ax.com>

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:57:14 -0400, "Eisboch" <rce@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>"Lone Haranguer" <linusz@direcway.com> wrote in message
>news:4mvsg1F80vlgU1@individual.net...
>>
>> I remember DeSotos having some type of assisted shifting in 1948.
>> Here is what I found.
>>
>
>Unusual transmissions are still made.
>
>I have an '06 BMW  M5 that has a 7-speed SMG transmission. (Sequential
>Manual Gearbox).  It is a manual transmission with a clutch (no torque
>converter) but has no clutch petal.  Shifting is accomplished manually by
>tapping on paddles on the steering wheel or by using the gear shift handle
>on the console.  It can also be driven in a pseudo "automatic" mode with the
>car computer determining upshifts and downshifts.
>
>Driving it takes some getting used to. When starting from a stop it behaves
>very similarly to a regular manual, with the engine revs rising as you
>depress the gas petal, and then the computer engages the clutch.  The speed
>of upshifts and downshifts may be programmed by the driver in one of six
>performance modes.  S1 - the most tame mode -provides very easy and
>relatively slow shifting.  S-6 - the highest performance mode is lightening
>fast and frankly violent.  It shifts much faster than a human could
>operating a clutch petal and also will allow multi-gear downshifts (from 6th
>directly to 3rd, for example) and there is no need to let up on the gas to
>do the shifting.
>
>It took me about 3 weeks to get used to it but now I love it.  SMG type
>transmissions had their origin in Formula 1 racing.

Er, ah, actually the trucking industry.  Probably something industrial
before that.  I bet BMW even hypes it as their innovation :-)  BMW's
like that.

My truck has a 10 speed "SMG" as you call it.  Eaton just calls it an
auto shifter or something like that.  Fully automatic plus pushbutton
manual shifting.  It has programmable shift programs but the computer
is smart enough that so far I've not seen the need.  The computer
detects the load and adjusts accordingly.  Tied into the same computer
is a smart 3 stage Jake brake.  That effectively makes the gas pedal
like the pedal on a hydrostatic transmission - press to go faster,
lift to brake.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: mileage
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:23:47 -0400
Message-ID: <dk2mg2pm17n5mhcvf4ra26hilp5bjmola1@4ax.com>

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 13:25:08 -0600, Dapper Dave <expurgated@gmail.com>
wrote:

>>oleblue <jmcninch@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>What kind of mileage does a motorhome class a disel get??
>
>Our 40' diesel pusher has recorded 7.9 MPG over the 49,000 miles since
>it left the factory. 99% of the time it has been towing something,
>mostly a 4,400# toad. The MH weighs 33,700# and has a Cummins ISC 350.
>
>We recently traveled several thousand miles with a friend who has a
>larger rig with a 525 HP Cat engine. His MH weighs around 47,000#, and
>his toad probably weighs 6,000-7,000#. He was getting around 5 MPG.

Just for comparison, I have the same engine in my International semi
tractor.  The computer says that I'm averaging 5.95 mpg overall
(including idling) and 6.72 mpg on the road.  (yeah, it really does
report to two decimal places) Tractor and trailer weighs right at 32k
unloaded.  I've been running fairly heavy, between 60 and 75k lbs. The
governor is set to 68 but I usually just set the cruise on 65 and
truck on down the road.

This illustrates that weight has only a little to do with mileage
(added losses from tire flex).  Frontal area and drag are the
controlling factors.  Despite their looks, slope nose semi rigs have
pretty decent Cd numbers.  That's why they do so much better than
those flat nosed MHs and coaches.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: Factory hitch vs. add on
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 19:39:19 -0400
Message-ID: <mn1pg2h9bgsqb4ptmo36j0ipcp48fjs3i3@4ax.com>

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 14:37:39 -0400, "Eisboch" <rce@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>"Neon John" <no@never.com> wrote in message
>news:grolg2pg6qjvads1ba9l048h94oub9hel9@4ax.com...
>
>> On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:57:14 -0400, "Eisboch" <rce@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>> Er, ah, actually the trucking industry.  Probably something industrial
>> before that.  I bet BMW even hypes it as their innovation :-)  BMW's
>> like that.
>>
>> My truck has a 10 speed "SMG" as you call it.  Eaton just calls it an
>> auto shifter or something like that.  Fully automatic plus pushbutton
>> manual shifting.  It has programmable shift programs but the computer
>> is smart enough that so far I've not seen the need.  The computer
>> detects the load and adjusts accordingly.  Tied into the same computer
>> is a smart 3 stage Jake brake.  That effectively makes the gas pedal
>> like the pedal on a hydrostatic transmission - press to go faster,
>> lift to brake.
>>
>> John
>
>I guess I should have been clearer.  The BMW SMG's origin used in their
>production cars had it's origin in the BMW Formula 1 race cars.

Oh, I know.  I was just firing another shot across the pretentious bow
of BMW.

>
>Does the Eaton transmission incorporate a torque converter or is it a
>conventional clutch system, automatically controlled?  There are many (in
>fact most) automatics with torque converters that can be "manually" shifted,
>but they are not SMGs.  I very, very rarely use the "automatic" feature.

A torque converter but not in the automotive sense I don't think. I've
yet to look up a description of the internal construction.  I know
that it grabs hard like a regular clutch and doesn't slip once
underway and does not disengage until stopped again.

Both the Eaton and the other brand (name slips my memory) use a
conventional 10 speed non-synchro gearbox.  The shift lever and gates
are removed and an air operated servo pack is dropped in place.  All
big rigs are now drive-by-wire which lets the computer intervene to
control the engine speed during shifts.  It does it just like I would
when slip-shifting (shifting without the clutch) a manual.  On
downshifts it goes to neutral, blips the throttle to bring the RPM up
to match the lower gear and re-engages - again, just like I would on a
manual.

The PCM controls the "throttle", the transmission and the multi-stage
Jake brake, complete with integral cruise control that unlike a car
cruise, will activate the Jake on hills to control the speed.

Though my company doesn't yet have it, there is a VORAD adaptive
cruise option that uses a phased array radar mounted on the front
bumper that controls the throttle and Jake to maintain a set distance
from the vehicle in front.  If a vehicle cuts into the following
distance, it backs off to re-establish the distance.  It even works in
stop-and-go traffic.  All the driver has to do is steer and brake when
a complete stop is required.  I've driven a truck so equipped and it
is wonderful!

US Express is one company that has gone with this system.  If you look
closely on the front bumper where the front tag would be, you'll see a
little flat black rectangular gadget.  That's the phased array
antenna.

US Express also uses a side-looking radar on the passenger side to
warn of dumb-ass 4-wheelers sitting in the blind spot.  I'd love to
have that, as even with 4 mirrors, there is still a little spot around
where the drive wheels are that I can't see without moving around a
lot in the seat.  For some reason car drivers just love to sit there.
I'm thinking about mounting an air-operated "train horn" right
there.... :-)

John, in Mobile, Al watching the Love Bugs do their thing :-)

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: mileage
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 20:04:07 -0400
Message-ID: <m24pg21drmi9gm6o5ifc386erjlfmrvr2l@4ax.com>

On 16 Sep 2006 08:12:28 -0700, "Rick Onanian"
<groups.theholycow@xoxy.net> wrote:

>Dapper Dave wrote:
>> This document has some great charts in regards to the various factors
>> that consume horsepower, from the cooling fan to the frontal area of the
>> vehicle:
>> https://ohe.cat.com/cda/files/287140/7/LEGT5364.pdf
>
>Nice find...interesting reading.
>
>I did not know that diesel engines fully cut fuel supply when coasting.

So do EFI gas engines.  The 70s vintage Bosch L-jetronic system did it
rather abruptly with a switch in the mechanical airflow meter.  Now
the computer does it so smoothly that you don't notice.

What annoys me on my big rig's MPG display is that it now goes to zero
when the fuel cuts off.  I liked it the old way where it displayed
999999.99 mpg :-)

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: Motorhome - Steep Driveway Clearance
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 12:23:59 -0400
Message-ID: <g3nah2pmjmooag846k3f6idc09cgvaerf1@4ax.com>

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:02:49 -0600, "Junior Brown"
<junior@jbrownsplace.com> wrote:

>I thought about building ramps from wood or steel, just to raise the lowest
>part of the driveway.
>They would have to be fairly big and heavy, and I guess if nothing else
>works..........
>I was hoping I could find some way (like air shocks) to temporarily raise
>the vehicle, if nothing
>like that was already installed.    Thanks.

Airbags will do the trick.  I'm not talking about simple booster bags
but the kind that semi trucks use on their suspensions.  Small
versions are available from mfrs like Firestone and Goodyear.

My semi tractor has a similar feature that does the opposite trick. It
lets me drop the 5th wheel several inches so as to get under very
heavy trailers without using a lot of force.  I just flip an air valve
on the dash and the back end drops.  When you're putting your kit
together you might want to look at Class 8 air switches.  The ones
used on both International and Freightliner look just like any other
dash switch but switch air instead of electrons.

The guys that chop and drop mini-trucks are a major user of these
things.  Look on the net for "minitruckin'" and "minitrucking" and so
on.  I have a friend who's big into that and who has a truck that can
raise or drop over 18" using nothing but air bags.

Basically, the only limit is how far the other part of your suspension
will extend.  The shocks are probably the limiting factor.  Maybe you
could whip up a shock mount with quick-pull pins so that you could
slide under there and slip the shocks loose before jacking up the
rear.

There's a company with a name something like "air ride" that makes
kits for a wide variety of vehicles.  I don't know if they'll have the
travel you need but it's something to look at.

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: Thinking about a GPS
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 17:06:23 -0400
Message-ID: <5fplh2dtangcq3hplpv45udd5btfkfp5qh@4ax.com>

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:23:50 -0700, "Steve B"
<boozoochavez@zydeco.net> wrote:

>
>"Jon Porter" <jporter@netwalk.com> wrote
>
>> Dad didn't understand that either until we took a trip with my GPS and
>> laptop last year. Even though he always knows where he is on a map
>> (retired military officer) he really likes how the mapping system of a GPS
>> works.
>>
>> JPinOH
>
>Turn him onto Google Earth.  You can actually fly into a locale by working
>the right buttons.  Absolutely incredible gimmick, and I think he'd have
>fun.

Even better is the pay version that takes input from a GPS receiver.
With Earth and wireless internet, it's absolutely amazing what one can
find.

I just made a pickup from a customer with nothing more than "look for
a big blue building near the water in Houston, TX.  I used google to
find the approximate address (google, mapquest and SA are all
notoriously inaccurate for Houston, probably because of the rapid
growth.) and then used Earth Pro to zoom in on the big BIG building in
the satellite overview.  Then I simply drove to it, letting GPS and
Earth guide the way.

SA, S&T and the others better watch out.  Google is about to sneak up
behind 'em and poke it to 'em.  As soon as wireless internet gets a
bit more reliable and a bit faster, Earth will rule!

I got a kick out of my dispatcher.  When I arrived I sent the usual
"arrived" message on the Qualcomm which also uploads my coordinates
from the GPS receiver built in the system.  That's unavailable to the
driver, of course.  She wanted to know how I found the customer so
fast.  I just smiled and typed back "GPS".

I'm sitting at a rest area right now and have just returned to the
truck.  As I walked the line of trucks I noticed that over half of 'em
had some sort of consumer GPS device on the dashes.  I couldn't see
any laptops, of course.  This reminds me 100% of how PCs invaded
business - employees snuck in their own units to make their lives
easier while the gods of MIS were deriding the "toys".  Interesting to
watch things repeat themselves again.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: Diesel ~ Not A Dirty Word!
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 15:01:16 -0400
Message-ID: <6d05j2perp5fnsisrolp1ui0gocckv6069@4ax.com>

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 07:06:04 -0600, "Ron Recer" <ron48@aol.com> wrote:


>> It's about time isn't it? The diesel electric makes the most sense for a
>> power source till maybe fuel cells can come on-line. I do wonder though
>> how a diesel electric would handle a long climb up a steep grade.
>> Hugh
>
>They seem to do quite well taking trains over the Rockies! <g>

After college I spent a year running a switch engine for TVA, carting
building materials from the Southern line to the Sequoyah NP
construction site, about a 5 mile run.  According to the "real" (read:
Southern) railway men, that run had the 3 steepest railroad grade in
the nation.  It was steep enough that I could usually only get 3 or 4
cars filled with prefab steel pipe up it with the 1000 hp engine,
always traction-limited.

As far as pulling, yes, it did that quite well.  The truck motors were
wound with high temperature ceramic windings and could get almost red
hot at times.  Hot enough to set the accumulated grease on fire.  When
that happened I'd just stick the nozzle of a CO2 fire extinguisher
into the cooling fan intake and blast away.  Had the local fire dept
called on me one time when I didn't get to it fast enough.  Apparently
the civilian didn't think that a locomotive climbing a hill with fire
shooting out of its wheels was normal :-)

The diesel-electric architecture brings several good things to a
locomotive, not many of which apply to a car.  First, it gets rid of
the need for a complicated and of necessity, quite rugged mechanical
drivetrain.  It acts as a variable transmission.  The generator field
can be changed to produce more voltage for speed or current for
pulling.  A trunk motor set can be switched out, sending all the power
to the other ones for more speed or to accommodate a failure.  And it
weighs a lot.  Weight is good on a loco.  I could pull an additional
car when my fuel tanks were full because of the extra traction.

The CVT would be the biggest benefit but the weight offset it until
recently with the development of super magnets and high power
electronic switches.

The batteries don't have to be big and they certainly won't be golf
cart pigs!  A major benefit accrues if the batteries (or supercaps)
are just large enough to absorb braking energy to kick back out during
acceleration.  Bigger batteries, of course, provide power augmentation
over longer periods but the big step in economy is with regen braking,
at least in city driving.

Big rigs will get serious hybrid technology (not that puny Prius
stuff) first because they'll benefit the most plus they have room for
the goodies.  We piss away TONS of energy on the Jake going down hills
and in braking.  Making that energy available for accelerating and
hill pulling will be wonderful.

Several years ago at a government-sponsored conference on alternative
motive power sources, I saw a semi equipped with some leading edge
stuff.  There was a radial gap permanent magnet generator of about
50kw capacity sandwiched between the bearing housing and the blower
body of the turbo.  A similar but larger motor was sandwiched in
behind the clutch, inside the flywheel.

This setup had the turbo supplying all the truck's electrical power
plus charging a battery pack for the motor to use for acceleration
boosting.  Regen wasn't yet implemented but that was just a matter of
electronics.

This was a proof of concept vehicle put together by the feds, US
Express and I believe, Freightliner.  Love to be driving one of those!

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.rv-travel
Subject: Re: Diesel ~ Not A Dirty Word!
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 05:52:26 -0400
Message-ID: <atk6j2tr9sl4tltsbcjo4il3lff4s2u1il@4ax.com>

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 01:08:10 GMT, "RAM³" <s31924.nospam@netscape.net>
wrote:


>Even without the batteries, that electric motor would still have to draw
>over 227.5KW - continuously - and that much "juice" would have to come from
>a generator/alternator capable of producing it.
>
>Have you any idea/concept of the >size< of that generator?
>
>Onan's PTO-powered Protec generators [it'd take 7 of them to do the job IF
>they could be synchronized] weigh 507# EACH - for a total of 3,549 pounds -
>not counting the powertrain elements needed to supply the power to drive
>them.

Irrelevant to traction applications, as tractions motors and
generators neither run at low speed nor run on 60 hz.

The permanent magnet 3 phase generator attached to the gas
microturbine that AVS used in its hybrid buses wasn't much larger than
a quart can of oil and weighed perhaps 40 lbs.  It generated 30kw.
I've held one of these in my grubby l'il hands (it sure tried to
stick!) and I have photos if you're really interested.  The turbine
and generator turns at something like 75,000 RPM.

The motor used in the GM EV-1 which produced, if my memory serves,
150kw of power at around 12,000 RPM, weighed a little over 100 lbs and
could be picked up by one man.  I've done so.

A 250kw gas turbine/generator might weight as much as 250 lbs but
probably not.  A 250kw traction motor would weight that much, mainly
because it does have to produce useful torque at relatively low speed
and it will typically be water cooled.

You might look around the net for aircraft APUs.  These are
micro-turbine-powered generators that produce up to a couple hundred
KW.  Typically 2-man-portable.  There's a hobbyist faction that
collects and operates these turbines just for fun.  Several good web
sites.

Nothing at all says that future roadgoing hybrid engines will be
reciprocating.  In fact, they probably won't be.  The same advances in
materials that turned ceramic ball bearings from an exotic to a
mundane commodity will do the same thing for microturbines when the
market is ready.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower
Subject: Re: small diesel generator
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 16:12:11 -0400
Message-ID: <1c4e63t51bgr1umk21npjapemgufkejc7b@4ax.com>

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 14:36:56 GMT, "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote:


>If you want a compact, quiet and reliable small diesel genset take a
>look at the new APUs being produced for semis. With fuel prices,
>emissions and noise regulations and general "greening" there are new
>diesel auxiliary power units being produced to power A/C and whatnot on
>the sleeper semis without having to idle the main engine. Not at all
>cheap, but they should be good units and as they become more common the
>cost should come down.

I spent last year driving an OTR truck just for the experience and to see the
country.  I have some experience with APUs.

In a truck stop, the two places you don't want to be is beside a reefer or beside an
APU.  Both make similar amounts of noise.  The engines are high speed (not sure if
1800 or 3600 but I think the later) but in any event they make a racket.  The APU is
set up specifically for trucking, with an AC compressor, a 12 volt alternator and
usually a 120vac generator.  Lot of extra hardware there if you don't need it.  Most
require connecting to the truck coolant system, or at least an external radiator for
engine cooling.

I was a big fan of APUs, or at least the idea, until I tried to sleep next to some. I
can sleep through a train wreck but those things are something else.  I don't think
it's the noise level as much as it is the variability and (sometimes) starting and
stopping.

Your dollars will buy a LOT more generator other than with APUs.  For the price of an
APU one could get an Onan variable speed inverter genny or the Generac QuietPack 75.
Both are quiet enough to be used in RVs.  There are a wide variety of ChiCom-made
diesels in the 2.5-5kw class that look nice.  Just search the web a bit.

One political comment.  The idle bans are nothing more than the next verse of "we
hate trucks, all trucks, but bring us our food anyway", wrapped up in the glowing
green mantle of environmentalism.  Modern truck engines are fully emission-controlled
and have been for several years.  A fleet truck is only good for about 3 years before
being replaced so much of the large fleet trucks are that young.  The engines are
particularly optimized for idle, given that the average OTR truck idles about as many
hours as it is on the road.  Fuel consumption has been greatly reduced in the past
few years and the exhaust has practically no odor.

"But it's an evil truck driven by a crazed homicidal maniac" or so the thinking goes
so it has to be banned wherever possible.  The idle ban has had an unintended
consequence.  Those little pony motors that power the APUs are NOT emission
controlled, nor to they have electronic engine management.  The visible soot is
evident, as is the CO.  The ONLY time my in-cab CO alarm ever went off was when I
parked beside an APU equipped truck and the wind was calm.

The truck haters have really stepped on their dicks on this one.

John

From: John De Armond
Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower,rec.crafts.metalworking
Subject: Re: MQPower generator with 7,000 hours
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 23:02:12 -0400
Message-ID: <jjqdv3tc7374t86uta0cm3lrkpqmik6r93@4ax.com>

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 02:39:50 GMT, "Greg O" <goo1959SPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Ignoramus20845" <ignoramus20845@NOSPAM.20845.invalid> wrote in message
>news:zb-dnc4N49D-NGvanZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Someone is offering to me a MQPower generator (often seen as rentals)
>> with 7k hours. How much life is left there, assuming good maintenance?
>> It seems well maintained. I believe it is a 4 cyl Isuzu diesel.
>>
>> Might swap my DJE for it.
>>
>> i
>
>Seems like allot of hours to me. To put it a perspective, 7000 hours at 30
>MPH equals 210,000 miles. Would you buy a car with 210,000 miles on it?
>A friend on mine ran a lawn service for many years. He ran a few Kubota
>diesels over the years. 3500 on a lawn tractor and they were starting to
>show the miles. Engine were starting to use oil, other parts were failing.
>He would run the machines maybe up to 4000 hours and trade. He kept
>meticulous service on his machines.

There are diesels and then there are diesels.  To use your car analogy, the slow
speed diesel in a semi truck is typically good for 1,000,000 miles to first major
overhaul.  The life of a slow speed (1800 or less RPM) generator diesel engine is
significantly milder, running at constant speed and usually less than full load.

Izuzu makes one of the best slow speed diesels.  If this is indeed a slow speed
generator and it appears that the maintenance is up to snuff then I'd not think twice
about 7000 hours.  It's just getting broken in good.

The OP really didn't give us enough information to make a definitive recommendation.
What size generator and whether slow speed or not, for instance, and what kind of
service it has been used for.  One can presume that a unit popular with rental
companies is both rugged and long lasting.  Beyond that, more info needed.

John