Formula E wants to add fast charging

Fast charging at this level is just not practical, nor does it 'prove' anything. 

What I think is needed and I am seriously considering doing it, a new EV racing series, for low-budget spec EV.

Short sprint races, not endurance racing.  

I guess it depends on if you view motorsport as entertainment (NASCAR), a test of the driver (spec racing) or a competition of man and machine (F1, Ultra4, LMPH, etc). If it's the latter, then pushing the limits of technology is 100% on the menu. And developing fast charging for EVs is very relevant to the rest of the world, probably more relevant than just about any other motorsport tech out there at the moment.

In reality, Formula E is more of a spec series with an entertainment twist (fan boost!) but if they loosen up the rulebook it could move into the last category. And it's fun to try to imagine what would be involved.

alfadriver said:

Keith Tanner said:

alfadriver said:

When we were melting dirt in the Idaho desert...

More info needed!

In Situ Vitrification- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191815X88900514 we were melting dirt to encapsulate waste into glass.  That paper was from Oak Ridge, we were at the Idaho National Engineering Lab, and there was another team at Hanford trying the same thing.  4 large carbon electrodes stuck in the ground fed by just under a MW would melt the dirt into glass.

And that's my frame of reference for the amount of power that would be needed for 1500kW charging rate.  To absorb that energy would be incredible.

Basically making lightning glass. That's crazy.

alfadriver said:

In Situ Vitrification- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191815X88900514 we were melting dirt to encapsulate waste into glass.  That paper was from Oak Ridge, we were at the Idaho National Engineering Lab, and there was another team at Hanford trying the same thing.  4 large carbon electrodes stuck in the ground fed by just under a MW would melt the dirt into glass.

I worked on a  large plasma arc torch project about 30 years ago that had the same purpose, the idea was to use it for encapsulating various kinds of toxic waste.  It looked kind of like a cross between a ray gun and a bazooka.    The first day we got it running, some of the guys ran out to the parking lot and got a few handfuls of gravel, it did a real nice job of melting it.  I have a large bolt on my shelf that got a half second blast from the torch, it looks like a melted candle.

stuart in mn said:

alfadriver said:

In Situ Vitrification- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191815X88900514 we were melting dirt to encapsulate waste into glass.  That paper was from Oak Ridge, we were at the Idaho National Engineering Lab, and there was another team at Hanford trying the same thing.  4 large carbon electrodes stuck in the ground fed by just under a MW would melt the dirt into glass.

I worked on a  large plasma arc torch project about 30 years ago that had the same purpose, the idea was to use it for encapsulating various kinds of toxic waste.  It looked kind of like a cross between a ray gun and a bazooka.    The first day we got it running, some of the guys ran out to the parking lot and got a few handfuls of gravel, it did a real nice job of melting it.  I have a large bolt on my shelf that got a half second blast from the torch, it looks like a melted candle.

Where at?  That was the same time I was in the Idaho desert doing the ISV work as a summer intern?  Amazing board we have here- two people working on similar ideas 30 or so years ago- but totally different methods.

For our system, the idea was solid, but IIRC, the real problem was that metal is heavier than glass, so all of the metal ended up at the bottom- not encapsulating it at all.

But it did teach me some very interesting chemistry that has helped me a lot in my emissions career- real basic stuff- pyrolysis.  

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Relative to this thread- it reminds me that on an level far less than the energy flow as we fill our gas tanks, the power is capable of melting a lot of stuff.  And knowing that batteries are not capable of absorbing energy that efficiently- well....  The cooling system needed to charge a battery at 1MW will be impressive.  Let alone the cables that are required to do the same.  Or the grid requirements to do the same.

It's one of those physics threads that leads me to conclude that EV's are not likely the actual replacements for ICEs.   Something that uses a stable, liquid fuel is far more likely.

alfadriver said:

stuart in mn said:

alfadriver said:

In Situ Vitrification- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191815X88900514 we were melting dirt to encapsulate waste into glass.  That paper was from Oak Ridge, we were at the Idaho National Engineering Lab, and there was another team at Hanford trying the same thing.  4 large carbon electrodes stuck in the ground fed by just under a MW would melt the dirt into glass.

I worked on a  large plasma arc torch project about 30 years ago that had the same purpose, the idea was to use it for encapsulating various kinds of toxic waste.  It looked kind of like a cross between a ray gun and a bazooka.    The first day we got it running, some of the guys ran out to the parking lot and got a few handfuls of gravel, it did a real nice job of melting it.  I have a large bolt on my shelf that got a half second blast from the torch, it looks like a melted candle.

Where at?  That was the same time I was in the Idaho desert doing the ISV work as a summer intern?  Amazing board we have here- two people working on similar ideas 30 or so years ago- but totally different methods.

For our system, the idea was solid, but IIRC, the real problem was that metal is heavier than glass, so all of the metal ended up at the bottom- not encapsulating it at all.

But it did teach me some very interesting chemistry that has helped me a lot in my emissions career- real basic stuff- pyrolysis.  

I worked for a company in Minneapolis that today is called http://www.phoenixsolutionsco.com  It was kind of an unusual transition, the company had its roots in building wind tunnels for the aerospace industry.

alfadriver said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Relative to this thread- it reminds me that on an level far less than the energy flow as we fill our gas tanks, the power is capable of melting a lot of stuff.  And knowing that batteries are not capable of absorbing energy that efficiently- well....  The cooling system needed to charge a battery at 1MW will be impressive.  Let alone the cables that are required to do the same.  Or the grid requirements to do the same.

It's one of those physics threads that leads me to conclude that EV's are not likely the actual replacements for ICEs.   Something that uses a stable, liquid fuel is far more likely.

The example that you are using to prove it unreasonable is a race series intentionally cutting the cars ability to finish a full race so they can force teams to figure out ridiculously fast charging. The ability to add a large amount of energy to a car quickly is won by the liquid fueled vehicle, but there are so many other considerations that it isn't the main decider. 

would batteries, generators, or big capacitors work better for fast "refueling"?

In reply to MrJoshua :

The thing is, not nearly 100% of car owners can charge their car overnight, or charge their car at work, or whatever people assume charging will be available.  So for EV's to actually replace ICE's, they do need to charge fast.   If the industry comes up with a fast battery change option that is easy to do, that would be one thing.  But Tesla isn't even considering that, and they are the "tech leader".  

And, realistically, that's exactly why Formula E is trying to demonstrate ultra fast charging.

Suspend a bumper car style power grid, one car wide, above one side of the longest straightaway. Drivers may exit the grid anywhere, but may only enter at the start of the grid. During last three laps of the race drivers may enter or exit anywhere. Can be traversed at any speed, but slower traverse means more power added to battery.

I would watch the hell out of that.

JG Pasterjak said:

Suspend a bumper car style power grid, one car wide, above one side of the longest straightaway. Drivers may exit the grid anywhere, but may only enter at the start of the grid. During last three laps of the race drivers may enter or exit anywhere. Can be traversed at any speed, but slower traverse means more power added to battery.

I would watch the hell out of that.

Sounds a lot like F-Zero :D

alfadriver said:

In reply to MrJoshua :

The thing is, not nearly 100% of car owners can charge their car overnight, or charge their car at work, or whatever people assume charging will be available.  So for EV's to actually replace ICE's, they do need to charge fast.   If the industry comes up with a fast battery change option that is easy to do, that would be one thing.  But Tesla isn't even considering that, and they are the "tech leader".  

And, realistically, that's exactly why Formula E is trying to demonstrate ultra fast charging.

Tesla did demonstrate it, actually. But then they went all-in on Superchargers. In my experience, those are fast enough to make current EVs a legit alternative to ICE on a road trip, and the tech will only improve.

Theyre not enough for racing, though. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Demonstrating it is one thing, setting the industry standard is another.  They should have worked with SAE and all of the other OEM's to come up with the replaceable packs.

Curious why that would not be enough for racing?  If everyone has to, then racing can be used to further the state of the art of fast battery changes.  That would help real cars a LOT.

I wasn’t clear. Superchargers are fast enough to make a EV a legitimate option in the real world. But they’re not fast enough to work in a competitive situation. That’s what I was trying to say.

The industry can’t even agree on wheel bolt patterns :) I can’t see them agreeing on a battery pack that will definite major parts of the car’s architecture. 

slowbird said:

JG Pasterjak said:

Suspend a bumper car style power grid, one car wide, above one side of the longest straightaway. Drivers may exit the grid anywhere, but may only enter at the start of the grid. During last three laps of the race drivers may enter or exit anywhere. Can be traversed at any speed, but slower traverse means more power added to battery.

I would watch the hell out of that.

Sounds a lot like F-Zero :D

I was going to say the same thing.  Played the heck out of that game.

By the way, do not look up F Zero on youtube.  All of the fun tracks have horrifying cheats like jumping the course.  That's no fun...

alfadriver said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Demonstrating it is one thing, setting the industry standard is another.  They should have worked with SAE and all of the other OEM's to come up with the replaceable packs.

Curious why that would not be enough for racing?  If everyone has to, then racing can be used to further the state of the art of fast battery changes.  That would help real cars a LOT.

Tesla shut down their lone battery swapping location due to lack of demand. Now there could be numerous reasons for that lack of demand, but the fact that battery swapping is essentially playing quality roulette with the most critical part of an EV probably contributed. 

That fear is unfounded in a racing series where the batteries would obviously be perfect, but it's a legitimate concern in the general public. And if there's no realistic path forward for the tech in the public realm, then the OEMs aren't likely to invest in it through a racing series.

alfadriver said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Relative to this thread- it reminds me that on an level far less than the energy flow as we fill our gas tanks, the power is capable of melting a lot of stuff.  And knowing that batteries are not capable of absorbing energy that efficiently- well....  The cooling system needed to charge a battery at 1MW will be impressive.  Let alone the cables that are required to do the same.  Or the grid requirements to do the same.

It's one of those physics threads that leads me to conclude that EV's are not likely the actual replacements for ICEs.   Something that uses a stable, liquid fuel is far more likely.

For motorsports usage, a liquid-cooled battery pack and a pair of dry-break connectors on the charging cable so that you can use a huge external liquid cooling reservoir and radiator for cooling the pack as you dump megawatt levels of charge into it seems like the obvious answer. You don't need a huge cooling system for the battery during use, just during charge, so build the cooling system into the charger, not the car.

And as for the everyday practicality of EVs, I've seen chargers at grocery stores, in parking garages, at condo and apartment buildings, etc, etc, etc. You can keep burning dinosaurs as long as you want, everyone else will choose what's most convenient to them as they make their own automotive choices.

Jerry From LA said:

According to the September 2019 issue of Race Tech Magazine, Formula E cars can go for a full race right now.  There was a battery breakthrough by a company called Atieva which allows the cars a full race distance with better performance to boot.

I have been working for a company called Lucid Motors here is Calfornia since last May. Atieva is the battery technology part of company. The office I work is about 30 yards away from where the Formula E battery packs are built and serviced between seasons.

The only thing I can add to this is that I know mid-race charging won't happen in the next season. Everything is out to the teams already.