Open Source Car Concept: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 50: Line 50:
     let me know what you think.
     let me know what you think.


=Conversation with [[Mark Rudnicki]]=
Some thoughts from Mark Rudnicki on Open Source Car:
    I think that Jim Kor might be willing to open source the Urbee if a good plan is presented to him.  I also think that you should lead initial discussions with him since you have clout (and I don't).


    I question if the RepRap machine can produce body panels that are strong enough and resilient enough to heat and cold.  Some early testing might be in order to check this.  We might find that the best option would be to use the RepRap machine to make forms for composite body panels.
-  Basing it on the Urbee would allow for fast progress of the OSCar.  Perhaps we can convince Jim Kor and his team to open source the Urbee.


    Do you propose that the only the rear wheel be driven? Doing so would reduce cost by obviating a differential, shafts, etc.
-  RepRap machines or modified larger versions of one could be used to produce the body panels for the OSCar, but it's unknown how resilient these panels would be to bumping and extreme heat and cold. Maybe RepRap machines could produce forms from which fiberglass or carbon fiber composite body panels would be produced.


-  Using a three-wheel design like the Urbee would probably allow for the OSCar to be registered as a motorcycle and therefore avoid a lot of legal requirements.


I was thinking direct drive to wheels - with motors serving also as brakes. No shafts/differentials in any case - those appear unnecessary. One rear wheel would do.
- Using a three-wheel design would allow for the back wheel to be directly driven which would obviate a differential, shafts, etc.


    Do you think that a fairly large accumulator should be used to temporarily provide reserve power that amounts to several times the steady output of the Power Cube? Such reserve power could be used for accelerating from a stop or accelerating into traffic.
-  Using a hybrid hydraulic system would allow us to exploit Power Cube technology.  The drive wheel would be coupled directly to a compact hydraulic motor. Regeneration from braking could also be conveniently exploited.


From our prior discussion - wasn't pneumatics (with separate hydraulic pump attached to those) the preferred route?
-  Using a fairly large accumulator would allow for good city fuel efficiency and good acceleration.
   


    I think that the aerodynamics of the Urbee could be improved to reduce wind drag, which is the main load on the engine at higher speeds. The Aptera has one of the most aerodynamic designs for a three wheel car that I know of and the open source car design could definitely borrow from it.
-  The coefficient of drag of the Urbee is quite good: 0.146 acccording to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient.


    What kind of windows do you think should be used? Plastic windows would obviously be lightweight, but would be prone to scratching.  Maybe initially using an off-the-shelf windshield would make the most sense.
- Plastic windows would be nice, but scratching of the windshield would be a concern.


Let's get a subject matter expert in on this question.  
-  As many off-the-shelf parts as possible should be used to allow for quick development.  Such parts could later be replaced by similar open source parts.


    Are you against using a significant number of off-the-shelf parts for the open source car?  I think that they could be used to significantly accelerate the development of the open source car and could always be replaced later with DIY parts of the same dimensions.
- A rough calculation for fuel efficiency is 140 MPG at 60 MPH assuming that a 10 HP engine would be used.
 
That's no problem. 3D scan them and make our own later.
   
   


    Let me know when you'd like to talk again to discuss the open source car.  Evenings are best for me, but I'm available for shorter conversations during working hours.
How about 8 PM CST on Thursday or Friday? Let's use this Call number.


Marcin


[[Category:Design Rationale]]
[[Category:Design Rationale]]

Revision as of 13:08, 22 April 2011

Wanted: NEEDS CLEANING and SHOULD ALSO BE PUT UNDER TRUCK

- Nice - Marcin

Conversation with Dan Foukes

It's 200/200, not 2000/200

No transportation outside of walking or cycling is necessary at that scale. For connection to other hubs, I suggest train. For transit to remote locations, I suggest a 200 mpg equivalent modern steam engine microcar hybrid. 


   statement1) We have a concept in mind similar to Urbee. Can you help us draw a concept with similar aerodynamics? We are considering a 1000 lb, 12-18 hp, hydraulic drive car, first plain gasoline, then moving to hybrid.

   responce1) creating a vehicle form scratch, modify something current, or recycle something from the past?


Modern with a 3D printed body using an open source printer. Urbee has a printed body. 


   for an example, google:cushman truckster.


Not highway safe. 


   hybrid is still in basic development. what about bio-diesel? you can make it your self.


How about modern steam fueled by pelletized biomass? We should have this in one year. In the meantime, gas or biodiesel is fine. 


   statement2)For the truck, we want a Unimog-like car with suspension, 60 mph. Main task is to design the suspension and steering, and then we can prototype. Once again - hydrauilic drive for add-on power units.

   responce2)what tonage is the unimog?


1 ton equivalent (F350) cargo capacity should be our first cut. It should have serious traction power like a F350 to do things like haul 20,000 lb of woodchips from 30 miles away, on a trailer. \ 

   how much tonage do you need? a ford or chevy diesel stake truck to run on bio diesel i think would work fine. would his vehicle be used to move the different equipment around?


yes, it would have attachment plates and hydraulic takeoff to handle anything that the tractor can. 


   in your list of 50 machines, what about a crane or forklift for loading and unloading equipment?


There is already the Tractor; a forklift is an inexpensive attachment for the quick-connect plate. 


   let me know what you think.

Some thoughts from Mark Rudnicki on Open Source Car:

- Basing it on the Urbee would allow for fast progress of the OSCar. Perhaps we can convince Jim Kor and his team to open source the Urbee.

- RepRap machines or modified larger versions of one could be used to produce the body panels for the OSCar, but it's unknown how resilient these panels would be to bumping and extreme heat and cold. Maybe RepRap machines could produce forms from which fiberglass or carbon fiber composite body panels would be produced.

- Using a three-wheel design like the Urbee would probably allow for the OSCar to be registered as a motorcycle and therefore avoid a lot of legal requirements.

- Using a three-wheel design would allow for the back wheel to be directly driven which would obviate a differential, shafts, etc.

- Using a hybrid hydraulic system would allow us to exploit Power Cube technology. The drive wheel would be coupled directly to a compact hydraulic motor. Regeneration from braking could also be conveniently exploited.

- Using a fairly large accumulator would allow for good city fuel efficiency and good acceleration.

- The coefficient of drag of the Urbee is quite good: 0.146 acccording to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient.

- Plastic windows would be nice, but scratching of the windshield would be a concern.

- As many off-the-shelf parts as possible should be used to allow for quick development. Such parts could later be replaced by similar open source parts.

- A rough calculation for fuel efficiency is 140 MPG at 60 MPH assuming that a 10 HP engine would be used.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Open_Source_Car_Concept&oldid=22162"