Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

autoblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–48 of 48 posts

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#41

Post by murkt »

hwillis wrote: post #38
murkt wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, I've also read the linked article and for me the summary is more like "HET motor has some interesting ideas, some difficulties, some claims are incorrect and it's probably a bit difficult to manufacture."

Interesting ideas- kind of, but the interesting ideas are not new. Dimensionality is one of the oldest formulated motor-related problems. Hybrid rotors are certainly an active area. The motor is a pretty novel and clever way to draw all these things together, but it's not the kind of thing to build a product around. Some difficulties- these are fundamental issues. They are fundamentally unsolvable with the suggested…

Thanks for a detailed response, it's quite informative and educational.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#42

Post by nerpderp82 »

justlexi93 wrote: post #4

The motors are not really taking up a lot of useful space in the car and are not underpowered by any stretch so this tech needs to be price competitive. Like Hyundai said batteries are where we need to see advances. Don't get me wrong it is interesting and I am glad to see advances but I don't see this as a terribly useful advance today.

Cars are not where a motor like this will be applied. Exoskeletons, shoes, airplanes will all need lightweight, high power density, high torque, gear free motors.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#43

Post by chongli »

VLM wrote: post #13

The key quote from the linked article seems to be "It’s essentially two concentric radial motors bookended by two axial ones." My question is where's the cooling? You can put more magnetic field and torque into an ever smaller area, always true, but still going to have to dump heat out via some path. And the bigger the path for whatever is cooling, the lower the magnetic flux density and torque. So I'd be interested…

Honestly, the car manufacturers might not be amused at the concept of selling fewer more reliable cars

Competition takes care of that problem. If all but one of the carmakers try to avoid selling “fewer more reliable cars” then the remaining carmaker can sell “way more more reliable cars.”

This is what happened when Honda and Toyota came along as the US carmakers were making very unreliable cars.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#44

Post by hwillis »

chongli wrote: post #43
VLM wrote: post #13

The key quote from the linked article seems to be "It’s essentially two concentric radial motors bookended by two axial ones." My question is where's the cooling? You can put more magnetic field and torque into an ever smaller area, always true, but still going to have to dump heat out via some path. And the bigger the path for whatever is cooling, the lower the magnetic flux density and torque. So I'd be interested…

Honestly, the car manufacturers might not be amused at the concept of selling fewer more reliable cars Competition takes care of that problem. If all but one of the carmakers try to avoid selling “fewer more reliable cars” then the remaining carmaker can sell “way more more reliable cars.” This is what happened when Honda and Toyota came along as the US carmakers were making very unreliable cars.

Competition does not "take care of the problem". There are counteracting forces that act through competition, and competition is inherently only partially restorative. It reduces incentives but does not eliminate them. Companies will only abandon early obsolensence to the point that it is profitable, which depends almost only on the customers naivete.

Worse, that viewpoint ignores the obvious and numerous counterexamples... Everything from apple (semi-reasonably but certainly in their own interest) killing batteries in older phones to outright conspiracy like the lightbulb mafia.

> This is what happened when Honda and Toyota came along as the US carmakers were making very unreliable cars.

You will note that US automakers are still some of the least reliable in the world. Its also ridiculous to suggest that japanese cars outcompete because of reliability. It was cost. It was also power, size, and quality. In fact when the civic took off in the US it was still not that reliable. Toyota and honda didnt get their current reputation until the mid 90s.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#45

Post by FlyMoreRockets »

redis_mlc wrote: post #24
VLM wrote: post #13

The key quote from the linked article seems to be "It’s essentially two concentric radial motors bookended by two axial ones." My question is where's the cooling? You can put more magnetic field and torque into an ever smaller area, always true, but still going to have to dump heat out via some path. And the bigger the path for whatever is cooling, the lower the magnetic flux density and torque. So I'd be interested…

Generally speaking, airplane engines avoid gearboxes for reliability reasons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geared_turbofan

Unlike helicopters, where they are used to drive the tail rotor. Even though dual disk helicopters don't need a tail rotor, they still need a gearbox to balance torque between the disks.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#46

Post by c22 »

VLM wrote: post #13

The key quote from the linked article seems to be "It’s essentially two concentric radial motors bookended by two axial ones." My question is where's the cooling? You can put more magnetic field and torque into an ever smaller area, always true, but still going to have to dump heat out via some path. And the bigger the path for whatever is cooling, the lower the magnetic flux density and torque. So I'd be interested…

The article does say:

> Furthermore, by using discrete rectangular coils inset into the stator poles, the HET needs 30% less copper than a motor of similar size. The design also eliminates end windings – lengths of copper that lie outside the stator in a typical motor, generating wasted magnetic field and heat.

So it sounds like less heat is part of the secret sauce.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#47

Post by gwbas1c »

hwillis wrote: post #23

Light expert analysis of this motor (it's nothing special and not manufacturable): https://www.anttilehikoinen.fi/technology/evaluation-of-the-...

Finally got the time to read through that link. Thanks!

The difficulty I had with that article is that I'm only familiar with how electric motors work at a high level. (I'm a software engineer.) An electrical engineer, or someone who's spent more time than me studying electric motors will be able to understand your link much better than I can understand it.

Thus, it's difficult for me to really understand the author's tone. Is it an honest evaluation of a promising technology where the author is pointing out lots of potential limitations? Is the author just plain biased? I just don't know enough about the field to make such a judgement. The conclusion, at the end, though, implies that HETs are very promising, but not ready for mainstream usage.

Anyway, for me, the questions basically come down to: How much will an HET car cost to compared to the "traditional" electric motor + reduction gear + differential + inverter + extra batteries. (Apologies if I got a term wrong.) Furthermore, is there a niche where the HET is going to be useful, like performance vehicles, or vehicles where the extra traction of dual motors is worth the extra cost, like pickup trucks?

Assuming the cost is a "slam dunk," or the extra cost is worth it for some niche, this is very promising indeed.

Re: Hunstable Electric Turbine can produce up to 3x the torque of other motors

#48

Post by bkev »

FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #45
redis_mlc wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally speaking, airplane engines avoid gearboxes for reliability reasons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geared_turbofan

Unlike helicopters, where they are used to drive the tail rotor. Even though dual disk helicopters don't need a tail rotor, they still need a gearbox to balance torque between the disks.

A conventional helicopter might not need to drive the tail rotor mechanically in this manner for much longer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJUgmeSYox4
Post reply on HN