Electric Vehicles

[NorthDallas40]

the Pepsi representative claimed:

"... we’re able to, on the trip back, actually zero out, in terms of state of charge improving due to regenerative braking,”

That makes three times you’ve dropped it since I told you Mother Nature doesn’t allow that. That’s ok I realize you aren’t smart enough to comprehend why that statement is BS Ronald.

 

[UT-Rex]

electrifying conservation

Good point !

 

[UT-Rex]

That makes three times you’ve dropped it since I told you Mother Nature doesn’t allow that. That’s ok I realize you aren’t smart enough to comprehend why that statement is BS Ronald.

I had earlier estimated 10, 20% energy recapture, and I'm describing it as free seeing as how the vehic isn't plugged in ; and, for some determined-by-Pepsi reason, the Pepsi rep is claiming a "zero out" regarding their (presumably all) downhill, return trip at Donner Pass (apparently, the downhill braking was related to only the return-miles).

Most of us here aren't engineers (I'm simply discussing what the Pepsi rep claimed).

 

[UT-Rex]

That makes three times you’ve dropped it since I told you Mother Nature doesn’t allow that. That’s ok I realize you aren’t smart enough to comprehend why that statement is BS Ronald.

We need to locate some professional studies, as to why engineers (or anyone) speak to non-eng folk on the Internet with this type of tone ^.

Right, I'm not an engineer / I'm simply quoting the Pepsi rep (in context of the Tesla-Semi / regen braking energy capture during the return route at Donner Pass):

“Going across Donner Pass and back from [Sacramento] to Nevada, we’re able to, on the trip back, actually zero out, in terms of state of charge improving due to regenerative braking,” Dejan Antunović, Pepsi’s electrification program manager, said in the video. “It extends range for us in a way that is invaluable.”

^^ I suppose the program manager knows what he's saying.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I had earlier estimated 10, 20% energy recapture, and I'm describing it as free seeing as how the vehic isn't plugged in ; and, for some determined-by-Pepsi reason, the Pepsi rep is claiming a "zero out" regarding their (presumably all) downhill, return trip at Donner Pass (apparently, the downhill braking was related to only the return-miles).

Most of us here aren't engineers (I'm simply discussing what the Pepsi rep claimed).

It isn’t free Ronald but it is energy that is otherwise just lost as waste heat.

This is a first year engineering thermo lab demonstration in potential and kinetic energy. The Pepsi rep was focusing only on the return trip down the hill where you have gravity assisting a great deal of the way and you can recapture some of that potential energy as regenerative braking. However you STILL have to spend kinetic energy to drive up the hill and raise the potential energy of the rig to the higher altitude. And you’re spending a LOT of energy to go uphill.

And this whole “regenerative braking adds range” is a misrepresentation of the basic dynamics problem anyway.

Imagine you’re driving on a perfectly flat road at constant speed. All you have to do is overcome rolling friction and aerodynamic drag. That’s your max range X. Now drive that sane road but now speed up and then slow down and then speed up etc… you will get range Y.

Y will always be less than X. You spend more energy to raise the vehicle speed higher than average and have a certain loss. Then under braking you recover some if that energy but there are conversion losses there also.

This is the basic setup most of your cherry picked marketing hype always dances around. You have a finite amount of energy stored in your battery. When you recover some if that energy with braking it’s energy you already pulled from your battery… unless you drive downhill every where you go. There are conversion losses going both ways pulling the energy from the battery to accelerate and then putting it back by regenerative braking. That’s why Y is always less than X in this example.

 

[NorthDallas40]

We need to locate some professional studies, as to why engineers (or anyone) speak to non-eng folk on the Internet with this type of tone ^.

Right, I'm not an engineer / I'm simply quoting the Pepsi rep (in context of the Tesla-Semi / regen braking energy capture during the return route at Donner Pass):

“Going across Donner Pass and back from [Sacramento] to Nevada, we’re able to, on the trip back, actually zero out, in terms of state of charge improving due to regenerative braking,” Dejan Antunović, Pepsi’s electrification program manager, said in the video. “It extends range for us in a way that is invaluable.”

^^ I suppose the program manager knows what he's saying.

He absolutely has no damn idea what he’s saying. And in my last post I just told you why. You’re welcome.

 

[StarRaider]

It isn’t free Ronald but it is energy that is otherwise just lost as waste heat.

This is a first year engineering thermo lab demonstration in potential and kinetic energy. The Pepsi rep was focusing only on the return trip down the hill where you have gravity assisting a great deal of the way and you can recapture some of that potential energy as regenerative braking. However you STILL have to spend kinetic energy to drive up the hill and raise the potential energy of the rig to the higher altitude. And you’re spending a LOT of energy to go uphill.

And this whole “regenerative braking adds range” is a misrepresentation of the basic dynamics problem anyway.

Imagine you’re driving on a perfectly flat road at constant speed. All you have to do is overcome rolling friction and aerodynamic drag. That’s your max range X. Now drive that sane road but now speed up and then slow down and then speed up etc… you will get range Y.

Y will always be less than X. You spend more energy to raise the vehicle speed higher than average and have a certain loss. Then under braking you recover some if that energy but there are conversion losses there also.

This is the basic setup most of your cherry picked marketing hype always dances around. You have a finite amount of energy stored in your battery. When you recover some if that energy with braking it’s energy you already pulled from your battery… unless you drive downhill every where you go. There are conversion losses going both ways pulling the energy from the battery to accelerate and then putting it back by regenerative braking. That’s why Y is always less than X in this example.

just a wild guess but physics ain't in rex's wheelhouse

 

[Orangeburst]

just a wild guess but physics ain't in rex's wheelhouse

The dang people that market this is what riles me.

 

[NorthDallas40]

just a wild guess but physics ain't in rex's wheelhouse

No doubt

 

[AM64]

Lol.

in simple terms:

"Also worth noting is that Tesla’s “regenerative braking” technology allows the trucks to be used on “hellacious routes” such as the Donner Pass."

"“Going across Donner Pass and back from [Sacramento] to Nevada, we’re able to, on the trip back, actually zero out, in terms of state of charge improving due to regenerative braking,” Dejan Antunović, Pepsi’s electrification program manager, said in the video. “It extends range for us in a way that is invaluable.”

Can't do it. Every change of energy state has losses. That means there is more battery discharge than the power to the ground. There is power loss in recharging the battery with regenerative braking. This wouldn't simply be perpetual motion; it would be something more. Somebody can't do basic math.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Can't do it. Every change of energy state has losses. That means there is more battery discharge than the power to the ground. There power loss in recharging the battery with regenerative braking. This wouldn't simply be perpetual motion; it would be something more. Somebody can't do basic math.

It’s a quote by a program manager. He’s probably already filed a patent application for a perpetual motion machine

And Rex puffed his chest out quoting that stupidity to me saying he has to know what he’s talking about

 

[AM64]

It’s a quote by a program manager. He’s probably already filed a patent application for a perpetual motion machine

And Rex puffed his chest out quoting that stupidity to me saying he has to know what he’s talking about

There are always so many people wanting to believe. Do you remember the "cold fusion" thing from many years ago? The Styrofoam cooler with wires coming out ... supposedly there was no power going in and power coming out. The "news" people were absolutely convinced it was real. Barnum was mostly right; he missed on the thing about convincing reporters who can in turn convince others ... reporters and stories are like magic shortcuts on a kid's board game.

 

[NorthDallas40]

There are always so many people wanting to believe. Do you remember the "cold fusion" thing from many years ago? The Styrofoam cooler with wires coming out ... supposedly there was no power going in and power coming out. The "news" people were absolutely convinced it was real. Barnum was mostly right; he missed on the thing about convincing reporters who can in turn convince others ... reporters and stories are like magic shortcuts on a kid's board game.

Yeah I do remember that. A blast from the past for those wanting to understand the reference.

Cold fusion died 25 years ago, but the research lives on

cen.acs.org

 

[kiddiedoc]

I thought Elon was crazy when he said he was going to land spent rocket boosters on drone ships.

 

[UT-Rex]

Can't do it. Every change of energy state has losses. That means there is more battery discharge than the power to the ground. There is power loss in recharging the battery with regenerative braking. This wouldn't simply be perpetual motion; it would be something more. Somebody can't do basic math.

Can't do what ? Recuperation, is what we're talking about, and one certainly Can (so, if you're arguing with the Pepsi rep, then take it to him << I was simply quoting him in the context of the efficiency, practicality and success rate of Pepsi's initial trial).

In context of Donner Pass / steep approach from the east = steep return from the west,

this seems to be the notion (where "zero out" may be an exaggeration on Pepsi's part):

"The higher the braking proportion, the higher the recuperation."

As for our family's Bolt, we're seeing 320 miles total range VS factory 260 (<< likely, as best we can tell, this is a result of RB).

If a semi-fleet can achieve a 10-20% gain-on-range from recuperation by RB (especially Local/Around Town routes), then I suspect that would be of great benefit.

 

[UT-Rex]

There are always so many people wanting to believe. Do you remember the "cold fusion" thing from many years ago? The Styrofoam cooler with wires coming out ... supposedly there was no power going in and power coming out. The "news" people were absolutely convinced it was real. Barnum was mostly right; he missed on the thing about convincing reporters who can in turn convince others ... reporters and stories are like magic shortcuts on a kid's board game.

EV is not hypothesized -- it's real.

Rocky knows:

 

[UT-Rex]

just a wild guess but physics ain't in rex's wheelhouse

you guys.

the electric motor in ev: "it can work as both a motor AND a generator" ; "the electric motor flips the script, switching from providing propulsion to generating electrical energy" ; "converting some of the vehic's kinetic energy into electrical energy" ; "it produces an electrical current that flows back into the vehic's battery (stored in the battery, ready to be used when needed)."

"saving, conserving and reusing energy"

 

[UT-Rex]

There are always so many people wanting to believe. Do you remember the "cold fusion" thing from many years ago? The Styrofoam cooler with wires coming out ... supposedly there was no power going in and power coming out. The "news" people were absolutely convinced it was real. Barnum was mostly right; he missed on the thing about convincing reporters who can in turn convince others ... reporters and stories are like magic shortcuts on a kid's board game.

^ that right there / your own thoughts ^ looks like a story / a report / quick tidbit of news of some sort, doesn't it ?

Don't you want to be believed ? Or are you just speaking into the wind?

 

[UT-Rex]

Can't do it. Every change of energy state has losses. That means there is more battery discharge than the power to the ground. There is power loss in recharging the battery with regenerative braking. This wouldn't simply be perpetual motion; it would be something more. Somebody can't do basic math.

Hold on, just compare your wording to the wording of other professionals:

yours: "There is power loss in recharging the battery with regenerative braking"
another's: "This electrical energy can then be fed into a charging system for the car's batteries"

"power loss" VS "energy can then be fed into the system"


"when the motor is run in the opposite direction, a properly designed motor becomes an electric generator, converting mechanical energy into electrical energy. This electrical energy can then be fed into a charging system for the car's batteries."

"The miraculous thing about regenerative braking is that it may be able to capture as much as half of that wasted energy and put it back to work. This could reduce fuel consumption by 10 to 25 percent."

How Regenerative Braking Works

Vehicles equipped with regenerative braking systems are able to recapture some of the vehicle's kinetic energy and convert it into electricity. This electricity is then used to charge the car's batteries. How is this possible?

auto.howstuffworks.com

 

[NorthDallas40]

you guys.

the electric motor in ev: "it can work as both a motor AND a generator" ; "the electric motor flips the script, switching from providing propulsion to generating electrical energy" ; "converting some of the vehic's kinetic energy into electrical energy" ; "it produces an electrical current that flows back into the vehic's battery (stored in the battery, ready to be used when needed)."

"saving, conserving and reusing energy"

It sure can. And the conversion process has losses in each direction just as I and now AM64 told you Ronald.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I thought Elon was crazy when he said he was going to land spent rocket boosters on drone ships.

He’s a really smart guy. But that doesn’t mean he isn’t making misleading statements on the physics involved in how his products work to the blissfully ignorant as we see occurring in this thread right now. It’s called marketing.

 

[LouderVol]

Lol.

in simple terms:

"Also worth noting is that Tesla’s “regenerative braking” technology allows the trucks to be used on “hellacious routes” such as the Donner Pass."

"“Going across Donner Pass and back from [Sacramento] to Nevada, we’re able to, on the trip back, actually zero out, in terms of state of charge improving due to regenerative braking,” Dejan Antunović, Pepsi’s electrification program manager, said in the video. “It extends range for us in a way that is invaluable.”

Right so they can run routes where the downhill part just so happens to equal out all the energy lost on the rest of the route....

Unfortunately you have to have the energy to make it up the hill first, before you can enjoy any regenerative braking benefits on the way down. so their summation of the situation is a bit misleading. Gas powered vehicles also save a good bit of energy on the down hill portion so its not some new find for EVs. Gas powered vehicles can also make use of that tech.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Can't do what ? Recuperation, is what we're talking about, and one certainly Can (so, if you're arguing with the Pepsi rep, then take it to him << I was simply quoting him in the context of the efficiency, practicality and success rate of Pepsi's initial trial)..

You quoted him as an informed source making factual statements you simp. And you still are. So you still are getting blow back on why Mother Nature says nope.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Right so they can run routes where the downhill part just so happens to equal out all the energy lost on the rest of the route....

Unfortunately you have to have the energy to make it up the hill first, before you can enjoy any regenerative braking benefits on the way down. so their summation of the situation is a bit misleading. Gas powered vehicles also save a good bit of energy on the down hill portion so its not some new find for EVs. Gas powered vehicles can also make use of that tech.

Oh you’ve done it now. We all know the uphill part was charged using unicorn farts so that energy cost doesn’t count because unicorn farts are free!

EVs do make better use since they can recapture some energy and in ICE it’s just waste heat in the brakes but yes ICE vehicles use less energy going downhill also. Shocking huh?

 

[InVOLuntary]

Yep. DOT vehicle gross is DOT vehicle gross. Heavier, less range, longer time to refuel. Everyone is gonna love these turds.

Wait until the gub raise it for Greta.