In rec.aviation.piloting Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 19:14:59 GMT, wrote in
:
If you go to http://xtronics.com/reference/energy_density.htm you find
the energy densities of a lot of things.
Propane (liquid) 13,900 Wh/kg
Diesel 13,762 Wh/kg
gasoline 12,200 Wh/kg
Ethanol 7,850 Wh/kg
Methanol 6,400 Wh/kg
Secondary Lithium - ion Polymer 130 - 1200 Wh/kg
Primary Zinc-Air 300 Wh/kg
Lead Acid Battery 25 Wh/kg
So batteries have to improve by a factor of 10 to match gasoline.
When you compare the efficiency of internal combustion Otto Cycle
engines (30% - 40%) against electric motors (80% - 95%), it appears
that a factor of five might be a more realistic comparison of their
relative merits. Then there is the issue of power plant weight...
Well, you have to look at total system weight.
A 100 HP electric motor is not going to be particularly light and
the power cables are going to weigh a whole lot more than fuel lines
for example.
When you look at the total installed system, assuming you have batteries
5 times better than you have now, I doubt the total weight difference
will be all that much.
Electric motors don't lose power in thin air either. With regard to
reliability, electric motors have only one moving part compared to
scores of moving parts for IC engines, their failure rate should be
substantially greater than IC engines.
AC motors have only one moving part but would require a beefy inverter
to generate (and induce more system loss) the AC.
DC motors have brushes but motor control is simpler.
If the DC motor was designed for easy inspection and replacement of
the brushes, then the failure rate should be much lower than a gas
engine.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.