Next-Generation VLC Improves on XPRIZE-Winning Design
9/25/2012
Altair will study suspension, vehicle impact, and structure to improve performance while minimizing weight on the Edison2 VLC 4.0 vehicle. (Source: Altair ProductDesign)
Beth, this is what we have to do to get to real fuel efficiency in cars. I am very interested in seeing how the compliant car works and what type of gas mileage they can get out of it. I really like the appoach,and the emphasis on physics rather than some alternative. If they can get 80 or more MPG from the ICE powered car, then they will be up there with the hybrids. It will be important to see what type of crash rating they can get. That will be critical for gaining consumer acceptance beyond a small niche market.
A drag coefficient of of 0.16 is really low, even in the world of concept cars. By comparison, the EV1 (which was actually a production car) had a drag coefficient of 0.195, according to Wikipedia.
I'm sceptical of it's aero as it has way too much intersection drag between the wheels and body to be that low which is much lower than ANY production car ever.
Maybe they are using a front area too big as the baseline to make it look better. I'd rather know the CDA as that's what makes the drag.
Next why is it so wide? With 4 wheels it doesn't need to be.
There is little reason it needs 4 wheels as 1 in the rear would be fine, less weight, drag and no diff needed.
Making the front full width doesn't have to increase drag, frontal area as it can taper just afterward keeping the FA about the same which is what I'm doing with mine. And it stops the intersection drag.
More space also leaves more space for crush zones as if this has a metal frame can't be very good crash wise. That's why I put the frame weight into my composite body/chassis making it far stronger for crash protection at the same weight vs a seperate body/frame.
But we really need such lightweight, aero vehicles so I hope they suceed. I just wish I had 10% of their money i'd be in production.
The Edison2 guys have more technology in one wheel than your entire knowledge of cars (that's not an exaggeration)- and you have the gall to say that you're "skeptical" of their aerodynamic design? They have had the vehicle tested in the GM wind tunnel and had official EPA coastdown testing - which both confirm that it is the lowest drag 4-seater car ever tested. The car body was designed by Barnaby Wainfan - the CHIEF AERODYNAMICIST OF NORTHRUP GRUMMAN! Oh..I stand corrected - your design is way more advanced aerodynamically: http://www.evalbum.com/168.html
FYI: The 3-wheeled Aptera and Zap Alias logged 0.87 and 0.85 g's respectively (and the Zap had Al Unser Jr. driving). Not bad...but not great.
I agree - a 3-wheel car is much easier to get certified because it is classified as a motorcycle. However, I'd like to see JUST ONE EXAMPLE of a tricycle that actually has superior driving dynamics.
I am not affiliated with Edison2 in any way - but I recognize engineering excellence when I see it. see their acheivements: http://www.edison2.com/facts-and-figures/
I wish they had 10X more funding....so they could make both EV and fuel powered versions of their car.
The Edison2 guys have more technology in one wheel than your entire knowledge of cars (that's not an exaggeration)- and you have the gall to say that you're "skeptical" of their aerodynamic design? They have had the vehicle tested in the GM wind tunnel and had official EPA coastdown testing - which both confirm that it is the lowest drag 4-seater car ever tested. The car body was designed by Barnaby Wainfan - the CHIEF AERODYNAMICIST OF NORTHRUP GRUMMAN! Oh..I stand corrected - your design is way more advanced aerodynamically: http://www.evalbum.com/168.html
----------------- Congrats you found my first EV built nearly 23 yrs ago for $500!!! Good for you. I've done a lot beter since then. I'm working on my new unit and will have a website up soon as it's more done. You can see it by going to Yahoo and click image with Freedomev jerry dycus keywords and it's the black one. Much cleaner aero you'll see.
-------------------- Busy little beaver I see. Maybe if the guy would stop lying and give me an actual address I can send his money certified mail I would. But he hasn't sent it and he lied about the money I already sent him and the product we agreed on. Nor did he mention I offered a equialent unit using Curtis contactors but he refused. Some people you just can't satisfy. I'm sure you never had idiots like this fool to deal with. I was having a 5 part heart bypass at the time so wasn't doing well. And thatcaused money, other problems at that time.
-------------- You might want to check out the Trihawk 3wheeler for better 3wh handling. I by the way helped Aptera get their EV drive sorted before the VC's stole it and ran it into bankrupcy by 'improving' instead of producing it.
FYI: The 3-wheeled Aptera and Zap Alias logged 0.87 and 0.85 g's respectively (and the Zap had Al Unser Jr. driving). Not bad...but not great.
-------------- ZAP is a scam, Read ZAP Wired keywords for the real story there. Read the Wired article and not the other misiformation ZAP put out under other alias'. Aptera was never a sportscar.
I agree - a 3-wheel car is much easier to get certified because it is classified as a motorcycle. However, I'd like to see JUST ONE EXAMPLE of a tricycle that actually has superior driving dynamics.
--------------- Trikes don't do great but done right, 2 front wheel 3wheelers can be very good. In mine the CG is 4" lower than a Corvettes and once sorted out should be very good because I can put battery weight so low.
I am not affiliated with Edison2 in any way - but I recognize engineering excellence when I see it. see their acheivements: http://www.edison2.com/facts-and-figures/
-------------- Yes they are good as I said, Just could be better protection and more simple. Mine is 2x's as strong in medium tech composites as a steel unibidy version. My composite frame between the composite skins is similar to a Corvette's leaf springs and as strong or more. And my body/chassis can be made in 6 manhrs for well under $2k.
I wish they had 10X more funding....so they could make both EV and fuel powered versions of their car.
----------------- So do I. Glad to make you so happy too! Seems like you enjoyed it.
Following your links I found the E-2 is 1060lbs and the aero test didn't include mirrors, engine air iinlets and the wheels are sealed in. Also the door, etc gaps are taped. And that is just what I can see in the small pics. So my points on aero still stand.
Under safety you'll notice they use 40% offset which means they just wiped off a front wheel, not a real frontal crash. I use the wheels as extra crash protection along with the batt pack, foam, crush bulkheads, etc.
In fact the E Woody you linked to was after I was rear ended at 25mph closing speed by a compact car. The compact car was totaled and I repaired mine for $40! ;^D
Why is I designed my rear wheel to take the hit and force my rear up letting the hitting car slide under it except my main wood/epoxy frame that went right through the compact car front. I walked away pi--ed but unhurt. My new one is many x's stronger.
Mine at 755lbs with a similar 10kwhr battery that has 2' more in front of crush space and likely 2-6x's as much strength in a frontal, side or rear crash. Nor will mine rust.
Between the 2 I'll still take mine for much better safety, likely as good aero, lower weight, better looks and about the same economy and 30-50% less production costs. I priced mine out and costs under $10k to produce and sell under $15k.
Wow - I'm speechless! What was the Cd of the FREEDOM EV as measured in a wind tunnel? And DEFINITELY better looking (although beauty is in the eye of the beholder).
As an electric I'll use the best windtunnel, the atmsphere ;^P On EV's one only needs to look at power used at various speeds to compute CD.
I've done aero/hydro for 35 yrs everything from high speed sailboats like a 32' one that go 25mph under sail or power, produced wind and tidal generators that many said couldn't be done yet I did.
Yet no comment on how E-2 gamed their WT/aero test? No comment on their crash test gaming?
Your other links show what kind of person you are. Sad.
With a 250 cc engine, probably about 40 BHP max. and that low weight of 830 pounds...(empty weight?) how does it handle? Now, with 4 adults on-board? It would be very interesting to know the basic numbers, acceleration, breaking, turning, and something about safety, otherwise it remains in that nebulous category of the prototypes.
@Amclaussen: It still is in the nebulous category of prototypes, so I'm not privvy to that information. But good questions, all the same, and definitely ones they'll need to address as they get further into the commercialized version of the original VLC design.
I agree - I would like to learn more. I also can't wait to see what a future version might bring. This car is cool. It looks like it's about to take off.
I followed these guys before and through the entire Automotive XPrize competition, and have conversed at length via email with Oliver Kuttner, their CEO. Let me tell you - these guys are the REAL DEAL. Zero hype, no crackpots. Check out their website: Edison2.com
During that competition, there were many "qualification phases" that required PRACTICAL performance - braking, acceleration, handling / cornering, range, safety, even emissions. They basically got first place in every area, as well as winning the overall "MPG race".
Their design team has designed several cars that won the LeMans endurance race. Even safety is an area that they have not scrimped on. They are total pro's. BTW: It was always a 4-wheel car, not 3 (like Aptera and Zap).
Regarding the low Cd - this was confirmed in the General Motors wind tunnel. Unlike many other cars (including, I believe, the EV1's low number that Charles Murray mentions) are kind-of "cheated" numbers. By this, I mean that the Cd they quote came from tesing a model of the "form" of the car body, but not including real-world things like mirrors, radiator grille openings, wheels, etc. The Edison2 numbers are REAL, including these things. The GM test manager commented that they have never seen such a low real-world number.
Their competition car burned 100% ethanol and got ~116 MPG. Their original plan was to use either a small ICE or diesel engine (non-hybridized, because the light weight makes the additional hybrid complexity less necessary). However, when they searched for venture capital to commercialize the winning design, noone would fund an ICE based car - so they have now changed to electric. Luckily, their low weight / low drag design is also very beneficial to an EV car because it reduces how much battery is needed - dramatically reducing weight and cost.
This is exactly the kind of company that should be encouraged and funded - real results, not just hype and spin.
Does every fringe hybrid or electric vehicle have to look wacky is some way like Homer Simpson's car?
These lightweight concept cars are so lightweight, they are scary to the average driver. My old 1985 Ford Crown Vic LTD would cut through where cars like butter on the road. Perhaps they should take some design cues from Tesla Motors Model S and Roadster, 89 MPGe and 119 MPGe respectively. They are efficient and look great.
Keep this in mind, the Toyota Prius has a curb weight of 2921 lbs and gets 50 MPGe. I am sure if Toyota removed as superfluous devices, tech, and comforts , it could get in the 100 range.
Now, if they would only adapt it for the consumer.
The basic design of the front end is a little reminiscent of some of the early designs of the Tucker. Per the movie, the fenders were to rotate when the front wheels turned. The idea was scrapped due to aerodynamic concerns. I wonder if this iteration will be better.
@JCA: I have to agree that some of these cars looks so sci-fi and out there, it's hard to imagine them in any kind of commercialized form. That said, if you compare the cars from the 60s and into the 70s with today's aerodynamic designs, at the time, they would have seemed pretty farfetched. I suppose it's all relative.
What's interesting about the photograph is that it looks like it started out as a 3 wheeler then had the rear wheels tacked on as an after thought. Since 3 wheelers are regarded as motorcycles could it be that an alternative is provided here which fits in with that market and achieves the 100 mpg for a 2 place 3 wheeler?
JamesCAnder: >Does every fringe hybrid or electric vehicle have to look wacky is some way like Homer Simpson's car?
Only the ones that win the $5,000,000.00 design competitions... ;-)
No mention of the runner up, which, could have been lighter faster and/or farther-ranged (but was probably dumpier!). Nice glossy paint job, btw! Thems the breaks, water-powered hover car made-out-of-balsa-wood-and-no-paint! Hope that $300 second prize covers your airfare!
I kid. But in a 'design competition' you need to 'dazzle em'. And there you go. Nice work, Edison2 team! (seriously)
An interesting writeup, aside from all the acronyms. Aside from the impressive fuel economy and the very low drag, though, there was not a whole lot of details about performance and handling. Such a lightweight car might be quite a handful in any crosswind situation, and I wonder if any testing has been done in that area. Given the driver skill level that most cars seem to be designed for, any vehicle less stable than a passenger train would have a hard time meeting the legal requirements for being marketable.
But possibly there has been more consideration given to that than has been presented. A follow-on with a lot more details would be quite educational and very interesting.
What I don't understand is why all of the engines FAILED and didn't even make it to validation. All of the numbers mean nothing if you don't validate the data, Edison2 never completed the testing that was required, they continue to evade the truth and lie to the consumers.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This radio show will show what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
16 
