Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/26/2016 02:24 pmNASA just awarded SBIRs for converting ISRU products (oxygen, methane, hydrogen, water, CO2, etc) into plastics. And since plastics contain carbon, that means from CO2 on Mars.Here are two of them:http://sbir.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/16/sbir/phase1/SBIR-16-1-H1.01-8453.htmlPROPOSAL TITLE: ISP3: In-Situ Printing Plastic Production System for Space Additive Manufacturingandhttp://sbir.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/16/sbir/phase1/SBIR-16-1-H1.01-8191.htmlPROPOSAL TITLE: Compact In-Situ Polyethylene Production from Carbon DioxideMars is of course a different matter all together. There is no other source of hydrocarbons there (other than some methane). Bringing it over would cost too much. So of course you need to produce it there. There is no alternative. It will take a long time though to get relatively moderate amounts of plastic that way. But then all metrics are somehow different anyway when it comes to mars.Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/26/2016 02:24 pmFor aviation, the single new technology that will shape the future of aviation is improved lithium batteries.Particularly lithium-air, which (along with electricity's high efficiency and other things) can allow electric flight for just as long as current jet liners. And at the same speeds. And potentially /faster/ speeds than current airliners.Nearer term, really good lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur.I agree with you on that one. Better batteries would be an enabling technology for many things related to aerospace. Depending on energy and power density, it might affect the way we do spaceflight too.
NASA just awarded SBIRs for converting ISRU products (oxygen, methane, hydrogen, water, CO2, etc) into plastics. And since plastics contain carbon, that means from CO2 on Mars.Here are two of them:http://sbir.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/16/sbir/phase1/SBIR-16-1-H1.01-8453.htmlPROPOSAL TITLE: ISP3: In-Situ Printing Plastic Production System for Space Additive Manufacturingandhttp://sbir.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/16/sbir/phase1/SBIR-16-1-H1.01-8191.htmlPROPOSAL TITLE: Compact In-Situ Polyethylene Production from Carbon Dioxide
For aviation, the single new technology that will shape the future of aviation is improved lithium batteries.Particularly lithium-air, which (along with electricity's high efficiency and other things) can allow electric flight for just as long as current jet liners. And at the same speeds. And potentially /faster/ speeds than current airliners.Nearer term, really good lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 12:10 amBattery technology is already much more advanced that most people in this realm realize. Batteries are still considered second-class.Which is why the electric airliner will catch those folk (who should know better) by surprise. Again. That's why I think even better batteries will dramatically shape the future of aviation.Keeping this discussion on-topic.. Whilst I've no doubt battery technology is already well advanced, as I people ointed out earlier, the real issue for aviation applications is getting the power (especially megawatts of take-off power!) out of the battery to somewhere it can be useful without losing most of it in the process. ..and ISTM they have yet to work that problem out...and until they get a good deal lighter, yes, batteries will always be considered second-class.
Battery technology is already much more advanced that most people in this realm realize. Batteries are still considered second-class.Which is why the electric airliner will catch those folk (who should know better) by surprise. Again. That's why I think even better batteries will dramatically shape the future of aviation.
Quote from: CameronD on 08/30/2016 04:24 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 12:10 amBattery technology is already much more advanced that most people in this realm realize. Batteries are still considered second-class.Which is why the electric airliner will catch those folk (who should know better) by surprise. Again. That's why I think even better batteries will dramatically shape the future of aviation.Keeping this discussion on-topic.. Whilst I've no doubt battery technology is already well advanced, as I people ointed out earlier, the real issue for aviation applications is getting the power (especially megawatts of take-off power!) out of the battery to somewhere it can be useful without losing most of it in the process. ..and ISTM they have yet to work that problem out...and until they get a good deal lighter, yes, batteries will always be considered second-class.Where did you get the idea that batteries are low power? Megawatts isn't hard when you have enough battery capacity for long duration flight, and good induction motors are competitive with jet turbines for specific power.If anything, batteries give you MORE power for takeoff. The few electric aircraft available boast about high power for takeoff vs their conventional cousins.That's why the long-range Tesla Model S P100D crushes every other production car on the road. It can harness a good half a Megawatt all by itself. And an electric airliner will have roughly two dozen times as much capacity. Megawatts is no problem. The problem remains capacity, and so initial electric airliners will be used for short-haul as we develop the higher capacity lithium-air batteries.
There are alternatives out there with better power/weight, and without the dangers of fire of lithium batteries.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 02:16 pmQuote from: CameronD on 08/30/2016 04:24 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 12:10 amBattery technology is already much more advanced that most people in this realm realize. Batteries are still considered second-class.Which is why the electric airliner will catch those folk (who should know better) by surprise. Again. That's why I think even better batteries will dramatically shape the future of aviation.Keeping this discussion on-topic.. Whilst I've no doubt battery technology is already well advanced, as I people ointed out earlier, the real issue for aviation applications is getting the power (especially megawatts of take-off power!) out of the battery to somewhere it can be useful without losing most of it in the process. ..and ISTM they have yet to work that problem out...and until they get a good deal lighter, yes, batteries will always be considered second-class.Where did you get the idea that batteries are low power? Megawatts isn't hard when you have enough battery capacity for long duration flight, and good induction motors are competitive with jet turbines for specific power.If anything, batteries give you MORE power for takeoff. The few electric aircraft available boast about high power for takeoff vs their conventional cousins.That's why the long-range Tesla Model S P100D crushes every other production car on the road. It can harness a good half a Megawatt all by itself. And an electric airliner will have roughly two dozen times as much capacity. Megawatts is no problem. The problem remains capacity, and so initial electric airliners will be used for short-haul as we develop the higher capacity lithium-air batteries.There are alternatives out there with better power/weight, and without the dangers of fire of lithium batteries.
Quote from: CameronD on 08/30/2016 04:24 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 12:10 amBattery technology is already much more advanced that most people in this realm realize. Batteries are still considered second-class.Which is why the electric airliner will catch those folk (who should know better) by surprise. Again. That's why I think even better batteries will dramatically shape the future of aviation.Keeping this discussion on-topic.. Whilst I've no doubt battery technology is already well advanced, as I pointed out earlier, the real issue for aviation applications is getting the power (especially megawatts of take-off power!) out of the battery to somewhere it can be useful without losing most of it in the process. ..and ISTM they have yet to work that problem out...and until they get a good deal lighter, yes, batteries will always be considered second-class.Where did you get the idea that batteries are low power? Megawatts isn't hard when you have enough battery capacity for long duration flight, and good induction motors are competitive with jet turbines for specific power.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 12:10 amBattery technology is already much more advanced that most people in this realm realize. Batteries are still considered second-class.Which is why the electric airliner will catch those folk (who should know better) by surprise. Again. That's why I think even better batteries will dramatically shape the future of aviation.Keeping this discussion on-topic.. Whilst I've no doubt battery technology is already well advanced, as I pointed out earlier, the real issue for aviation applications is getting the power (especially megawatts of take-off power!) out of the battery to somewhere it can be useful without losing most of it in the process. ..and ISTM they have yet to work that problem out...and until they get a good deal lighter, yes, batteries will always be considered second-class.
Bus bar?? No, you'd use high voltage aluminum wire. A very small fraction of the weight you're imagining. You simply design the system to have high enough voltage so the weight of the wiring isn't a major drawback. And doesn't have to be long, either, the batteries can be fairly near the motors, whether in the wings or fuselage.High frequency plasma? Why. You're overthinking this.
Where did you get the idea that batteries are low power? Megawatts isn't hard when you have enough battery capacity for long duration flight, and good induction motors are competitive with jet turbines for specific power.If anything, batteries give you MORE power for takeoff. The few electric aircraft available boast about high power for takeoff vs their conventional cousins.That's why the long-range Tesla Model S P100D crushes every other production car on the road. It can harness a good half a Megawatt all by itself. And an electric airliner will have roughly two dozen times as much capacity. Megawatts is no problem. The problem remains capacity, and so initial electric airliners will be used for short-haul as we develop the higher capacity lithium-air batteries.
The battery will be installed in one large building at the Alamitos Power Center in Long Beach, Calif
Zahurancik confirmed that, to the company's knowledge, this is the largest grid-scale electrochemical battery in development. DOE energy storage archives confirm this as well.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/30/2016 02:16 pmWhere did you get the idea that batteries are low power? Megawatts isn't hard when you have enough battery capacity for long duration flight, and good induction motors are competitive with jet turbines for specific power.If anything, batteries give you MORE power for takeoff. The few electric aircraft available boast about high power for takeoff vs their conventional cousins.That's why the long-range Tesla Model S P100D crushes every other production car on the road. It can harness a good half a Megawatt all by itself. And an electric airliner will have roughly two dozen times as much capacity. Megawatts is no problem. The problem remains capacity, and so initial electric airliners will be used for short-haul as we develop the higher capacity lithium-air batteries.Just came across this article on a 100MW lithium battery (roughly enough for an average twin-jet) to be built in SoCal. Of note is: QuoteThe battery will be installed in one large building at the Alamitos Power Center in Long Beach, CalifQuoteZahurancik confirmed that, to the company's knowledge, this is the largest grid-scale electrochemical battery in development. DOE energy storage archives confirm this as well. http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/The-Worlds-Biggest-Battery-is-Being-Built-in-Southern-CaliforniaSomehow I don't think that's going in a plane anytime soon!
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/31/2016 12:11 amBus bar?? No, you'd use high voltage aluminum wire. A very small fraction of the weight you're imagining. You simply design the system to have high enough voltage so the weight of the wiring isn't a major drawback. And doesn't have to be long, either, the batteries can be fairly near the motors, whether in the wings or fuselage.High frequency plasma? Why. You're overthinking this.Maybe I am.. but I'm still curious to know how high a voltage you're thinking of.I haven't got the time to run the numbers properly now, but for a quick BOTE calculation for 50MW (the approx. generation capacity of a GE CF-6 at take-off power) could mean 50kV DC @ 1000 Amps - and 1000 Amps worth of aluminium wire is still a hunking great chunk of metal. I'm also not sure (a) whether you could string enough fancy Lithium batteries together to generate 50kV @ 1000 Amps and still fit it on an airplane (and that's only one engine worth, remember) and (b) whether the high-voltage motor control systems required are possible at >50kVDC with even near-future technology. Still, even if incredibly inefficient and impractical, it's an interesting concept... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current
It's also possible to liquid-cool the wires, which greatly enhances the power carrying capacity and reduces the wiring mass.
It should be noted that Supercharging operates at over 300 Amps over a single cable. An electric aircraft is likely to have several motors (perhaps even a dozen, if distributed propulsion takes off. heh.).
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/31/2016 02:33 pmIt should be noted that Supercharging operates at over 300 Amps over a single cable. An electric aircraft is likely to have several motors (perhaps even a dozen, if distributed propulsion takes off. heh.).It's amazing how quickly these technologies take wings.. (pun intended)http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nasas-x-57-electric-research-plane
It's amazing how quickly these technologies take wings.. (pun intended)http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nasas-x-57-electric-research-plane
Quote from: CameronD on 09/08/2016 08:02 amIt's amazing how quickly these technologies take wings.. (pun intended)http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nasas-x-57-electric-research-planeIt mentions a "five time reduction in energy requirements".. thats pretty incredible.. maybe they will produce a pedal powered version
Quote from: KelvinZero on 09/15/2016 10:15 amQuote from: CameronD on 09/08/2016 08:02 amIt's amazing how quickly these technologies take wings.. (pun intended)http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nasas-x-57-electric-research-planeIt mentions a "five time reduction in energy requirements".. thats pretty incredible.. maybe they will produce a pedal powered version Heh. Sounds more like someone in NASA's PAO got a little bit over-excited..