Charging technology..

Charging technology..

If Magnets can used to create coils, and in turn be used to create generators.. Why not install Magnets on the inner wheelwells of the rims of the tires, and opposing magnets/coil generators on the body chassis opposite the rims, so when the tire rotates it creates a constant charge of electricity that in turn can be used to maintain a constant charge on the batteries?? If this was applied to all 4 wheels, then I would think enough charge could be created to keep the battery at full charge as long as the vehicle is moving. This would not work to charge the vehicle when not in motion, but if a customer charges their vehicle at home overnight, then goes out driving the battery could be kept fully charged and may only require to be plugged into the grid after days or weeks of minimal driving. In theory, I think the vehicle could drive thousands of miles without ever needing to be plugged into a grid. If Lithium batteries in phones allow the user to use the phone while it is plugged in and charging, there should no reason that the above technology could not do the same thing.

Volker.Berlin | 25. kan 2011

Another perpetual motion machine (perpetuum mobile). If your invention would work, it would be better than fusion energy. But it cannot work b/c it is a fundamental law of physics that a system cannot return more energy than you put into it. Quite to the contrary -- every energy conversion, e.g., from kinetic to electric or back, suffers from "losses". Losses in quotes, b/c energy is not lost, it just takes a form that you cannot use for your intended purpose, usually heat.

So, what's wrong with your idea? Given the explanation above, whenever you come across an idea like that, you can rest assured that you overlooked some "energy leak". In your case, the additional magnets would require additional energy to push the car forward. And you would not even be able to entirely reclaim that additional energy. With your idea in place, the entire system would have less range, not more.

This is also the reason why regenerative braking is worse than not braking at all. The regen recovers only a fraction of the energy that was invested to push the car forward before (and the same amount of energy is needed to bring it up to speed again after the stop). It is much better to stop the propulsion early and then just keep rolling ("sailing") as long as possible, than to maintain propulsion and then stop using regenerative braking.

BTW, you are not alone. This forum is full of suggestions like yours. :-)

jfeister | 13. juli 2011

If the magnets in the wheels were 100% efficiency in their energy conversion, and the motor was 100% efficient, and there was no friction within the drive-train or at the tires, and there was no air resistance, your idea would work great.

It's the friction, air resistance, and inefficiencies in the motors and generators that eat away at the stored energy of the car over time.

If this is a topic that you find interesting, I suggest searching "entropy" and "conservation of energy" to learn more about these kinds of physics.

I'm a mechanical engineer myself. When I was a kid I tried to build a perpetual motion machine based on capillary action. Good times.

roseland67 | 14. juli 2011

This has already been discussed in JB Straubels "Engineering Update on Powertrain 1.5" published in May 2008. Not taken into account is magnetic drag that occurs when moving magnets create current flow,
ie: more energy will be consumed than made.
You have to go atomic to arrive at the "more energy out than in" scenario, (google: rossi reactor :-)

dborn | 20. juli 2011

No, but i have suggested previosly that induction charging is virtually available from people like powermat.
here is a comment from a review of a Rolls Royce concept electric vehicle.

"Increase the range to 400km and it’s a fair bet that it would walk out of the showroom doors. Battery technology is not quite able to allow such a feat yet, but it’s certainly on its way. There’s even induction charging available to ensure convenience is covered – if you’re interested, the efficiency difference between plugging the 102EX into the wall and parking it over an induction loop to charge is around three percent. Induction is extremely effective."