Electric And Other Alternative Fuel Aircraft At AirVenture 2010

barnstorm2

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
14,573
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Aircraft
2-place Air Command CLT SxS (project), & Twinstarr Autogyro
Total Flight Time
750+hrs and climbing
Here are some of my photos from Oshkosh.
 

Attachments

  • Nikon Oshkosh 2010 Thursday 129.jpg
    Nikon Oshkosh 2010 Thursday 129.jpg
    126.2 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 001.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 001.jpg
    144 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 005.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 005.jpg
    140.2 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 006.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 006.jpg
    138.7 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 066.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 066.jpg
    133.7 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 065.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 065.jpg
    140.3 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 064.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 064.jpg
    133.8 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 071.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 071.jpg
    133.3 KB · Views: 0
Next set..

BTW, I took lots of close up if anyone wants more detail...

.
 

Attachments

  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 080.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 080.jpg
    135.3 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 081.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 081.jpg
    144.6 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 082.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 082.jpg
    138.7 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 083.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 083.jpg
    134 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 084.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 084.jpg
    131.4 KB · Views: 0
  • OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 085.jpg
    OshKosh Wed Thursday 2010 085.jpg
    137.3 KB · Views: 0
Nice shots! Thanks.
 
The Chinese company Yuneec really has it together and is on the cutting edge, too bad America has too many lawyers trying to sue on liability lawsuits that squashes american inventors and innovation.
Kitplanes Mag had an article on the yuneec electric aircraft.
very cool stuff no doubt.
 
The reason we don’t and won’t see battery powered rotorcraft is something called energy density. The Li battery stores 128 watt-hours/Kg.

Gasoline, powering a piston engine with fuel consumption of 0.5 lb/hp-hr yields energy equivalent of 3300 watt-hours/Kg.

It makes no difference how clever the designers of electric motors and controllers are, the limiting factor is batteries.

Electric bicycles and sailplanes are one thing, requiring ¼ hp and 2 hp respectively but not many rotorcraft will fly on less than 50 hp.

50 hp with an electric motor efficiency of 90% would require storage capacity of 41.4 kWh for a one hour endurance. The Chevy Volt Li battery pack weighs 400 lb. and stores 16 kWh. Load it down with 1,000 lb. of batteries and it won’t fly on 50 hp.

Electricity isn’t magic.
 

Attachments

  • whr.JPG
    whr.JPG
    15.9 KB · Views: 0
Was it tried recently a combination of a small engine to generate electrons and a electric motor? Or is it still too complex for a little gain?
 
Imho

Imho

Today's electric motors with permanent magnets etc. have exceptionally good power-to-weight ratios. Soon motors will be developed specifically for aircraft, and for rotorcraft. These motors will be optimized for air-cooling; just as today's reciprocating aircraft engines are.

Today's rotorcraft builders have the wonderful opportunity of discussing; conceptualizing, developing, building, and testing features that are specifically applicable to tomorrow's electric rotorcraft. The abilities to have; ground testing, hover testing by cable, hybrid power supply, and very short-term all-electric power, exist today.

There is no reason why these innovative ideas have to participate in two or three hour flights today. The innovative can still dream of tomorrow as they work on their project today.


Just a related idea:

What if a person or company were to provide a genset that would be taken to rotorcraft events so thats others could bring their projects for ground testing or cable attached hovering.

This 'publicizing' would lockup the idea up for one year should he wish to patent it, and find potential investors, while also motivating others.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Today's electric motors with permanent magnets etc. have exceptionally good power-to-weight ratios. Soon motors will be developed specifically for aircraft, and for rotorcraft.
The problem is not the electric motor, it's the battery. LiPo is a great improvement, but not enough for a gyroplane. Their prices decreases rapidly, not weight.
Jean Claude
 
Batteries and energy production are the main issues in most electric driven vehicles – I think.
Most projects talk about a lot of other things - to attract investors, sponsors etc...

Just as we did, when I was involved in electric driven vehicles :D
 

Attachments

  • PIC00005.jpg
    PIC00005.jpg
    27.9 KB · Views: 0
The weight of electric motors and controllers is not an issue although it’s unlikely they’ll ever come close to the power-weight ratio of a gas turbine. It still takes copper and iron to make an electric motor and always will.

The weight of energy storage is and always will be an issue.

In the 100 years since pasted plate lead-acid batteries have been around, energy density has improved by a factor of three. Perhaps in another 100 years energy storage will improve by another factor of 3 but I doubt it; battery chemistry is what it is. Gasoline storage beats today’s battery best by a factor of 25.

There are many applications where battery storage of electricity makes sense: cordless power tools, fork lift trucks, electric wheel chairs, etc.

It also makes sense in hybrid automobiles where the energy normally burned up in braking can be recovered.
 
Electric propulsion is a great idea, however, for backpack propellor. You only start it occassionally and for a short time if you missed a thermal lift.

Kai.
 
I agree about what has been said about chemical batteries….they will never be a viable storage option for aircraft. The future for all electrical storage will come in the form of a capacitor type device. I can see electrons being compressed into "electron tank", becoming much like a liquid and metered out as needed. This tank would need to be armored due to a spectacular lightening show if breeched.
 
The problem is not the electric motor, it's the battery.

Jean,

Everyone will agree. However, billions of dollars are, and will be, spent in the search and development of electric storage or something-to-electric conversion devices.

I speculate that the electric motor will do much more for rotorcraft then what the turbine did for rotorcraft.


Dave
 
Perhaps, Dave. Pending this, electric pre-launcher without energy storage is probably interesting:
Brushless motor + reduct.1/3 (7000 rp: 3 hp / 3 lbs
Electronic Controller 48v 60A : 0.2 lbs
Same as above Brushless motor (as ALTERNATOR) (7000 rpm) : 1,3 lb.
Rectifier/regulator voltage : 0.2 lbs
Pulley + belt : 1,5 lbs
Electrical cables and capacitors filter : 2 lbs
Of course, added ring and Bendix.
http://www.100pcaero.com/moteurs/mo...hless/produit-tdo-w63k1-kv250-1163-10406.html

Jean Claude
 
Last edited:
Gyrocopter consideration

Gyrocopter consideration

Jean,

For the discussion and consideration of ideas, what about having the prerotator also serve as a partially power rotor? Dennis Fetters has mentioned that applying some power directly (non-aerodynamically) to the gyro's rotor results in an increased efficiency.

Building on your idea.
Does anyone know if a 3-phase brushless motor can serve as a generator by having it's 3 wires directly connected to the 3 wires of a similar 3-phase brushless motor?

If the 'generator' can drive the motor efficiently under load (no slipping), the purchase of a factory-reject Fisher & Paykel motor may result in electrical gearing (speed reduction) between the generator and the F&P motor.


Electrical gearing;
1916.jpg

The above F&P motor has 36 teeth in its stator. If the 'generator' has 3 teeth there is a 36/3 = 12:1 reduction in speed at the F&P motor, which is direct driving the gyro's aerodynamic rotor.

The above is only a theoretical idea, but someone with a couple of 3-phase brushless motors and a hand drill could quickly check out the basics.

Dave
 
Dave,
Apply mechanic power to the rotor changes progressively from the gyroplane to an helicopter. Efficience is better, but not the price. (I prefer an engine fueled with water, even with disastrous efficience!)
Your synchronous transmission seems to me too heavy and dangerous (risk of dis synchr.)
My suggestion is to generate a DC voltage with small brushless alternator and a rectifier, and so a usual DC controller for brushless motor (3hp maxi). It seems possible now.
Jean Claude
 
Last edited:
Jean,

I am proposing a single gyrocopter rotor not two synchronous rotors. I think that this is what you are proposing, except;

1/ Have the option of using the prerotator during flight, and

2/ Like you, "generate a voltage with small brushless alternator" but eliminate the rectifier and the DC controller. The control would simply consist of a 3-pole On-Off switch. The 3 poles would would be 1 for each phase.


Dave
 
Top