backtop


Print 91 comment(s) - last by ddh.. on Jul 19 at 3:56 PM

Researchers show off EV charging through the tires

Several notable issues are preventing electric vehicles from entering the mainstream consumer market today. Perhaps the biggest issue that is keeping the average consumer from buying an electric vehicle is range anxiety. Another major issue for many car shoppers that might otherwise consider an EV is a much higher cost of entry compared to a traditional automobile.

Another more pressing concern is one of recharging an EV and finding a power receptacle when away from home. A team of researchers from the Toyohashi University of Technology has unveiled a very novel and much more interesting way to recharge an electric vehicle wirelessly. The team from the University is led by Takashi Ohira and has recently been showing off a wireless electric field coupling system that can charge an EVs batteries through the tires. The big benefits of this system are four points of charging, rather than one point that we typically see in other wireless charging systems. That opens the door to the possibility of transferring more power to the vehicle at one time resulting in faster recharging.

The researchers have been showing a demo where a metal charge plate is placed under a four-inch layer of concrete to represent road surface. The team was able to transmit between 50 and 60 W of power through actual automobile tires and make a light bulb attached between the two tires turn on. The University researchers call the project EVER (Electric Vehicle on Electrified Roadway).

Another interesting possibility with wireless charging through the tires is that the team has been able to demonstrate the ability to transmit that power through a concrete block and into the tires of the vehicle to charge the batteries. That means with the right infrastructure an electric vehicle could be charged as it drives down the road.

There is no indication of when or if this project might be commercialized.

The U.S. Energy Department recognizes that charging is a challenge facing EVs and in April of 2012 offered up to $4 million to companies willing to develop wireless chargers for EVs. So far, most of the wireless chargers we've seen consist of some sort of charger on the surface of the driveway or road and a receiver mounted to the underside of the vehicle.

Source: Phys.org



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Don't really get it.
By othercents on 7/11/2012 12:51:55 PM , Rating: 2
Nice business sense you have of weighing cost vs profit and looking at long term investments. IF EV is the car technology of the future then we will have to have a way to run longer distances than 100 miles. *PERIOD*

Now, you look at the other technologies available and you will see that electric options (hybrid or electric only) are much more accepted than the other options and they provide better MPG than any of the other options. Any option will require us to upgrade infrastructure which is added costs.

Which cost would you rather have? Bullet train between San Fransisco and LA, or inductive charging built into the roads between San Fransisco and LA? Which will cost less? Which will people use more?

I understand there are going to be dead spots and it will take more than my lifetime to create, but doesn't mean that should stop us from moving in that direction, unless you have a Mr Fusion device for us?


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 12:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, we do need to come up with ways to increase the range of EVs. And we're going to have to invest a trillion dollars to upgrade the grid at some point anyway.

However...let's not be so lazy as to just inject new losses into the system at the same time. Create contact-charging systems for the home that are automatic, if people well and truly are too stupid and lazy to spend 10 seconds plugging their car in when they get home from work.

...and I'd hazard to guess that putting field induction things into CA's highways would be much more expensive than your train. Especially when you consider the multiple lanes involved and the disruption of traffic (and therefore business) while you're doing that.

Better solution would be to natively increase the range of EVs to the point where we don't have to worry about charging as you drive. If you could get 200 or 300 miles on a charge, and then just plug your car in when you get to your destination, probably no point in charge-as-you drive anyway.


RE: Don't really get it.
By kingmotley on 7/11/2012 1:09:05 PM , Rating: 2
You know this technology isn't limited to just under the road. You can also use it for under the garage. Or under a parking lot.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 1:21:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yes...and it's just as wasteful there too. Throw away millions of dollars per year because you're too stupid and lazy to spend 10 seconds plugging your car in...or just spend 10 seconds plugging your car in. Hmmm...which is better?


RE: Don't really get it.
By kingmotley on 7/11/2012 1:24:08 PM , Rating: 2
Which is better? Spending $2.50/mo so I don't have to bother, is better in my opinion. Feel free to have your own.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 1:33:58 PM , Rating: 2
You are entitled to your opinion. However...your opinion is wrong.


RE: Don't really get it.
By othercents on 7/11/2012 1:10:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However...let's not be so lazy as to just inject new losses into the system at the same time. Create contact-charging systems for the home that are automatic, if people well and truly are too stupid and lazy to spend 10 seconds plugging their car in when they get home from work.


I never said that we should charge wirelessly from home. My only point was that the contactless system is to charge over the road. They eluded to the infrastructure required in the original post.

quote:
...and I'd hazard to guess that putting field induction things into CA's highways would be much more expensive than your train. Especially when you consider the multiple lanes involved and the disruption of traffic (and therefore business) while you're doing that.


There is always disruption of traffic for highway projects and it is possible that this could be added to any project at a minimal cost except for infrastructure upgrades like power-plants which could be added later. I bet even the train project will require them to move the roads. There might even be a system in place to enable and disable the charging surfaces as an EV approaches that road surface.

quote:
Better solution would be to natively increase the range of EVs to the point where we don't have to worry about charging as you drive. If you could get 200 or 300 miles on a charge, and then just plug your car in when you get to your destination, probably no point in charge-as-you drive anyway.


My trip to my parents house with my 2 kids and my brothers trip to his in-laws house with 4 kids are in the 1,000s of miles. Too expensive to fly with that many kids and I wouldn't want to recharge 4 times to get to a destination. Today I just jump into my SUV and make the trip, but in the future it might just be electric only.

My vote is for the Mr. Fusion.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 1:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
The future might include standardized battery packs that can easily be swapped out at "gas" stations. Or you might be driving an ICE car or hybrid that uses biofuels. Or...whatever.

EVs will be here in the future. But there's no reason to think we won't improve upon their long-distance utility (in non-wasteful ways), or that only EVs will be around.


RE: Don't really get it.
By kingmotley on 7/11/2012 1:28:42 PM , Rating: 2
And you think any of those things will be 100% efficient in their use of energy? How naive.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 1:34:41 PM , Rating: 2
Nope. But, I know that they won't artificially be introducing new amounts of waste that we don't have today simply to accommodate the stupidity and laziness of morons like you.


RE: Don't really get it.
By kingmotley on 7/11/2012 1:43:35 PM , Rating: 2
You call it waste, but I call it convenience. If I happen to forget to plug the car in (which I am likely to do) and it causes me to be late to work even 30 minutes every 54 months(that is once in 4.5 years), I've lost more income than the "waste", and I've burned up some good will at the office.

Still an unbelievable good trade for me AND I don't have to waste to 10 seconds every day AND I have one less thing to think/worry about every day AND I don't have to worry about tripping over the damn cord AND I don't have to worry about me (or my wife) forgetting to unplug and ripping the cord/socket and damaging the car/garage and costing me a lot more than $2.50/mo.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 1:45:59 PM , Rating: 2
AND you don't care about the additional burden to society that you and all your friends are by moronically wasting millions upon millions of dollars's worth of the most important energy source our society has.

Holy f%ck you're a self-centered a$$hole.


RE: Don't really get it.
By kingmotley on 7/11/2012 1:48:54 PM , Rating: 2
Nope. The solar panel on the roof of my garage is powered by the Sun. And I'll attach a wireless charger for my car to it. Unless you are trying to ration the sun.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Florinator on 7/11/2012 2:42:17 PM , Rating: 2
Unless the sun shines at night where you live or you work night shifts and are at home during the day, I don't see how this will work...


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 2:45:18 PM , Rating: 2
So that's going to help you charge your car at night...how?

And granted that the solar panel on your roof only generates a very limited amount of power in a day, wouldn't it be intelligent of you to not waste any of it?

Sorry - you continue to lose.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Motoman on 7/11/2012 2:07:56 PM , Rating: 2
AND you're the poster child of the self-centered, overly-entitled jacka$$ that epitomizes everything that's wrong with modern society.

Thanks for proving before the whole world what a worthless POS you are.


RE: Don't really get it.
By Florinator on 7/11/2012 2:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
There, I fixed it for you.

quote:
AND you're the poster child of the self-centered, overly-entitled jacka$$ that epitomizes everything that's wrong with America today.


I also happen to think it's wrong to accept waste for convenience, but then again, I'm the type of guy who washes his plastic fork and knife (that I get for free in the office kitchen), so I can reuse them the next day...


RE: Don't really get it.
By othercents on 7/11/2012 2:33:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The future might include standardized battery packs that can easily be swapped out at "gas" stations. Or you might be driving an ICE car or hybrid that uses biofuels. Or...whatever.


Perhaps, but I would hate to swap my brand new car's batteries for another older set at a "gas" station, or pay for all these extra batteries to be kept charged. And think of all the gas stations that would have to be retrofit or built to accommodate the batteries along with security. I think this might have been why they are not researching this area as much as remote charge.

We have plug-in hybrids now and maybe we don't ever become fully free from oil (at least not in my life time). However I bio-fuels are another issue since there are many environmentalists are upset about using food for cars. Then you have the economists upset about all the government funding required to make bio-fuels profitable.

quote:
EVs will be here in the future. But there's no reason to think we won't improve upon their long-distance utility (in non-wasteful ways), or that only EVs will be around.


I think if history is of any indication of the future then we will continue to do just as many wasteful things in the future as in the past. Overtime those wasteful things will be upgrade to be less wasteful and re-engineered to be better then they are now, but we have to start somewhere.


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki