| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Mechanics Forum » The New X-Prize
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
|
| Author |
Message |
| Aaron Anodide |
 Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mar 20, 10:51 pm, "PolicySpy" <PInt...@notmail.com> wrote:
Quote: The new X-Prize is for a car that gets 100 miles-per-gallon and like the
previous X-Prize is for ten million dollars.
That's alot of bucks! I've been thinking about high efficiency cars
for a long time, although I'm not an inventor - I think I have a few
good ideas.
Quote:
Now there are a lot of rules but in general the car must get 100 MPG, it
must reach a performance level (but not high performance), it must have four
wheels, it must be possible to manufacture, and it will be compared to other
entries.
I'll have to check out the rules. Hey if I give you an idea you can
work with, then you can share part of the prize. Heck, 2.5 million
would work :)
Quote:
Snip.... (is it OK to do that snipping thing - I've been gone for awhile from NG's
GOAL: Get the car to go further with a given amount of fossill fuel.
SOLUTION: Increase the effeciency of said car's use of fossill fuel.
(a) The lifecycle of a car ride.
(a.1) Off
(a.2) Starting.
(a.3) Started.
(a.4) N number of state transitions:
(a.4.1) (Speed = 0) --> Acceleration
(a.4.2) Acceleration --> (Speed > 0) [i.e. the light turns green]
(a.4.3) Acceleration --> (delta Speed) [i.e. press on gas or brakes]
(a.4.4) Acceleration --> (no change in Speed) [i.e. Changing Langes]
(a.4.5) Acceleration --> (Speed = 0) [i.e. Slowing to a stop]
(a.5) Turning Off
(a.6) Off
Are you with me this far? If so, I'll elaborate.
Do I sound like a lunatic? This is Aaron Anoddie - I've been posting
here on and off for years under various logins. I'm not a trained
Physicist, but I can think abstractly and sometimes have valid things
to say.
Regards,
Aaron |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Brian Whatcott |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:29:04 -0700 (PDT), Mike H
<mike8675309@gmail.com> wrote:
...
Quote: My thoughts turn immediately to the Ford Festiva: 1.4 fuel injected
engine, four seats, bags of cargo room through the back gate, and as
sold, 43 mpg on a steel unit body. They went with a 100 kmile drive
train warranty. My wife's lasted a quarter million miles.
Did I say 43 mpg in standard trim?
Glass doors, lid and body panels, and you're up to 60 mpg no sweat,
I'd say....
Perhaps for the World market, but for the American Market, the Toyota
Camry is pretty much the typical family car. That would be a true
winner. A Ford Festiva, would not IMNSHO.
Ha! When my wife's Festiva recently dumped transmission oil and
demolished its transmission after a quarter million miles, she bought
a used Camry - and she's been oohing and ahing about it since then.
But a Camry doesn't come with a 43 mpg tag either....
Brian W |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg Locock |
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mechanical Magic <google@mechanicalmagic.com> wrote in news:3bd2c346-
f407-4b3c-97df-fbd43aedd00d@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
Not for aeroplanes it isn't. The reference area is (from memory) the
wing planform area.
So your comparison is out by a factor of 5 or more.
Your claimed CdA for the Learjet fails the reasonableness test since it
implies laminar flow over the entire shape, which is not possible.
Cheers
Greg Locock |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:59 pm
|
|
