Video: 130 MPG Ingo car gets local news coverage
Ingo Valentin was interviewed on local news station WISN recently about his 130 MPG Ingo Car. The car uses in-wheel motors that run on fluid pressurized from a small on-board gas motor. Ingo hopes the car will win the X-Prize so he will get the funding needed to get the car into production. The car has interesting features like regenerative breaking, but I am not too sure about the bumpers that store energy if there is an accident. The use of pressurized fluids seems to be an emerging and clean automotive technology (see links below) and may beat out electric and ethanol cars to take the X-Prize.
Related:
- Are hydraulic hybrids more efficient than electric hybrids?
- Fedex to develop and test hydraulic series hybrid delivery van
- BBC News video: Air Car out "by end of year," in Europe, for 3,500 Euros
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mirko 5:35PM (1/30/2008)
This is intersting... the free-piston diesel engine / pressure pump assembly looks like pure genius.
Reply
Mort 5:36PM (1/30/2008)
Outstanding.
Reply
Tim 5:58PM (1/30/2008)
Tanks are a LOT less expensive than Li-Ion batteries and hydraulics is a very well known tech.
We'll have to wait and see which technology the brilliant politicians choose to give our tax money to. That will be the tech we're all stuck with.
mmmmmmm.... corn
Reply
evolknuj 6:01PM (1/30/2008)
Why is this different from the 'air car' that seems to be dismissed by readers of this blog? People were saying that the inefficiencies of compressing air and then using it to perform work were insurmountable, that the only way it was worth it was if the energy to compress the air was essentially free (e.g. a wind turbine on your garage).
Now the Ingo car is using an onboard ICE to compress a nitrogen bladder in the accumulator. Do the same inefficiences not apply for some reason?
Reply
Tony Belding 6:12PM (1/30/2008)
Evolknuj: As I'm reading things, the Air Car compresses all of the air to provide all of its motive power. The Ingo car uses a hydraulic system with an incompressible operating fluid. The nitrogen bladder is part of the regenerative braking system, and its compression losses only occur as part of the regen cycle -- not every time power is applied.
Reply
evolknuj 8:07PM (1/30/2008)
According to the official website:
The piston of the free-piston internal combustion engine pumps hydraulic fluid into the accumulator. It stores the energy by compressing the gas bladder inside. The engine will be turned off automatically when the accumulator is filled – and turned on again shortly before it becomes empty.
The pressurized fluid drives the wheelmotors, one in each wheel.[...]
The wheelmotors are reversed during braking and become pumps.
It sure sounds like the Ingo car is simply compressing air with the ICE, and using that stored energy to drive the wheels. The only difference between this an a 'true air-car' is that the air car uses air to drive the wheel motors, while this uses the air pressue to push hydraulic fluid through the wheel motors. In either case, the energy is going ICE -> pressure wheel, and the inefficiencies involved in converting pressure to work will be involved.
If the ICE was only driving the hydraulic fluid directly through the motors rather than compressing an air bladder, the wheel HP would only be equal to the ICE HP minus hydraulic transmission losses (which are considerable). If so, why are they bothering with the hydraulic transmission at all?
The Ingo car is simply an air-car with hydraulic fluid mixed in. Right? Is this just hype like air-car hype?????
Reply
Lascelles Linton 12:14AM (1/31/2008)
evolknuj, The air car is not exactly hype. They have drivable cars and are connected to Tata, a large auto maker. The only concern really, is not does the technology works, but release date. They say a year or two but I would guess three or more. A lot more. The hydraulic stuff, as Tony explained, in a lot more... now! The air stuff is brand new tech. Hydraulic is every where today. There is nothing to invent really. So, while it might seem like a slight difference to say in-wheel and series, for the more technical-types, it's a very elegant solution.
Reply
Mirko 12:15AM (1/31/2008)
evolknui, the Ingi is running the ICE at a constant rpm - although the term "rpm" doesn't apply, because there is nothing that rotates - no crankshaft, the engine piston directly pushes the air compressor piston.
It also uses the wheel motors to fully replace brakes - that's why it needs 600+ horsepower wheel motors.
Reply
GenWaylaid 12:24AM (1/31/2008)
While the free-piston pump looks clever, I have strong reservations about the design. The first and most obvious problem is with seals. The difficulty of keeping combustion on one side separated from hydraulic fluid on the other side is a serious challenge, especially as the engine ages, and burning small amounts of hydraulic fluid is not good for the environment or anyone.
Furthermore, I have doubts the free-piston motor would even run as drawn. To see what I mean, try plotting the pressure on each side of the piston through a "suck squeeze bang blow" cycle. There is no available force for the compression stroke, and the available expansion ratio would vary depending on the back-pressure in the accumulator. The simple way around this issue and the sealing problem is to use separate cylinders for the combustion and the pump, with a suitably sized flywheel to maintain inertia.
One difference between a gas-charged accumulator and the system in an "air car" is that the accumulator is a closed system. The inert gas is never exhausted from the system, nor for that matter is the hydraulic fluid. The gas in the accumulator is compressed and expanded gradually, so its temperature should not vary much. This wastes less energy than expanding the gas rapidly in a pneumatic motor.
With a more conventional pump design this concept has promise. Hydraulic drive has been used on certain large industrial vehicles for years. However, it will have to deal with issues such as component weight and long-term fluid leakage that affect all hydraulic drive systems.
Reply
Peekoyle 5:34AM (1/31/2008)
Wow! Rather impressive!
I think this guy will be getting a bullet in his letterbox for sure ;(
Reply
Chris 5:55AM (1/31/2008)
So he has the drive portion down. He seems to be ignoring the fact that all the accessories need power. (that or I don't see it)
He is only claiming three to four miles per full charge so the rest of his efficiency has to come from the ICE. I am also not sold that he has fixed the free piston engine problems.
Finally, his mileage relies a lot on weight savings, 2200 4 passenger car? The fluid resivor has to be carbon fiber which would its cost beyond commercial prospects. He is also using a cd of .22 meaning... this is all based on calculations which have too many variables he hasn't proven can be met.
Reply
Throwback 8:59AM (1/31/2008)
The auto X-prize is doing what it's creators hoped for. Making people think outside the box. Who knows if this will work, but at least there are people using their imagination. Guys like Edison, Firestone etc, used their imagination a lot and changed the world.
Reply
Steve 11:50AM (1/31/2008)
Edison was a crackpot. Tesla did all the real work on electricity. All Edison ever did was invent a lightbulb. His plan was to use DC to power EVERYTHING, meaning if any one of your neighbor's devices failed, so would the power, for them, for you, and for everyone else in your neighborhood.
RE: the car, it seems like a decent idea, at least in theory. Obviously there kinks to work out, just like with any car design, but the idea itself seems promising. Also, I've been wondering, could the waste heat from the ICE be used to increase the gas pressure? It seems like a hydraulic/ICE hybrid has the potential to significantly improve ICE efficiency from my armchair engineering perspective. So, given that, could we potentially see an ICE/hydraulics/electric trybrid?
Reply
evolknuj 11:28AM (1/31/2008)
I'm still not convinced that this design offers significant benefits compared to the air car - it would seem to me that in either case you are compressing and expanding air (a sealed nitrogen bag in this case) in order to store and extract energy. The heating and cooling of the air as you compress and expand the air means that some of the energy from the ICE and even from the regen braking will be lost. I didn't do the calculations myself, but detractors of the air car concept seemed certain that these losses made the whole system a poor idea. If the only difference is the efficiency of hydraulic motors vs pneumatic motors, I'd be skeptical of the claims.
Theoretically, one might use the hydraulic fluid surrounding the nitrogen bag as a heat sink - absorbing the heat of compression and returning it to the expanding air - to reduce the losses. But I can't picture a flexible bag covered in cooling fins to make the transfer happen.
Hopefully Ingo will build at least one prototype and prove somebody right and somebody wrong!
On the plus side, it seems that the interesting part of this design is the hydraulic system, not the free piston pump. Another more proven compressor design could easily be used if the free piston pump proves problematic.
Also on the plus side, the T shaped tank arrangement would be an automatic fit for something like the XR3 (http://rqriley.com/xr3.htm) - heck it practically matches the XR3 layout perfectly. If the drive concept actually works, it'd be a cinch to redesign the XR3 around it. The XR3 is supposed to be only 1300 lbs and have a very low drag coefficient. If tanks could be made reasonably cheaply (carbon fiber pressure vessels don't sound DIY friendly), this would simplify the XR3 systems considerably. And that's a good thing :-)
Reply
Ingo Valentin 5:47PM (1/31/2008)
Thank you for the critique. The project report 'The 130 mpg Car' includes all technical information needed to evaluate the concept. The report can be obtained through:
www.valentintechnologies.com Here: 'About us' - New Energy Congress - Top 100 Technologies - #34 Valentin Technologies - Official Website - The 130 mpg Car.
Ingo Valentin
Reply
Lascelles Linton 5:45PM (1/31/2008)
Ingo, I updated the article with a direct link to your website. Good luck!
Reply
A.Brien 8:31PM (1/31/2008)
u.s.a should invest some millions in that compagny instead of billions in irak to secure oil. I would like to drive a prototype of that car.
Reply
Chris M 11:38PM (1/31/2008)
The pluses: a compact design, could be fairly reliable. The hydraulic accumulator (in the center, not the bumper) should be very reliable and long lasting. The combined IC/hydraulic engine is innovative, compact, and could be inexpensive to build. The entire vehicle could be low cost, assuming the accumulator doesn't cost too much.
The minuses: Energy storage is very limited, thus limited "plug-in" option. There are thermodynamic losses that occur with every change in accumulator pressure, and those losses increase with greater pressure fluctuations. It could end up being less efficient than an electric hybrid for that reason, and miss the fuel economy goals. There is potential for troublesome leaks with those wheelmotors, and the hydraulic connecting lines, and in the hydraulic pump/IC engine.
Reply
Dave 1:32AM (2/06/2008)
Here's my two cents:
1. Forget the wheel motors and switch to two motors on each of the axles. This way, cost and complexity are greatly reduced, existing inexpensive lockable differentials can be utilized (think gerotor pumps) and side-to-side anti-lock breaking system is built-in.
2. Drop the free-piston and put in a turbocharged two-stroke diesel. Exhaust heat can further improve thermal efficiency of the concept.
Reply