RE: Al Melling Interview
Discussion
NiallOswald said:
Mars said:
Batteries will never be any good. Fuel cells will prove to be more flexible in the long-run. I reckon fuel-cell tech will completely kill off all battery research in the next decade.
Why so? Hydrogen fuel cells are essentially a battery technology - got any energy density and cycle efficiency figures to support your claim?Mars said:
NiallOswald said:
Mars said:
Batteries will never be any good. Fuel cells will prove to be more flexible in the long-run. I reckon fuel-cell tech will completely kill off all battery research in the next decade.
Why so? Hydrogen fuel cells are essentially a battery technology - got any energy density and cycle efficiency figures to support your claim?no reason you can't charge betterys way faster, the issue is what from?
there are 'flow' batteryies that hold their charge in a liquid that flows though the bettery, so in theory you could use this and just exchange the fluid to re-charge, however, it's just as feasablle to have battery exchange or even battery to battery charging (so you can have the chargers battery on charge 24/7 from a low current supply, and then 'dump' this into the cars battery at speed)
the point is that without the development effort, none of these will take off, and all the money (from the oil companies) at the moment is into Hydrogen... Ask yourself why that would be?
jdman said:
hi i own the TVR built f3000 with a 4.5 ajp it was produced by the factory in an attempt to start a single seater class with the ajp but never took off so only one was made. I am hoping to put it on a rolling road next month for its first run since 1994. It will be interesting to see what sort of power is produced as there is no restrictions of airflow to the engine.
Interesting, can't wait to see what sort of figures you get.Keep us updated, especially in the Cerbera forum
Marquis_Rex said:
Melling said:
What is your favourite engine of all time?
I have been an engine designer for 40 years and I would like to think that I have not yet met my favourite engine. Engines are designed with a particular application in mind; for example a Formula 1 engine is for F1, it would be no use for anything else. Regarding sports car engines do we consider exotic, complicated, durability or do we just consider power? If we take the AJP8, it is a very simple engine, but it has the highest power to weight ratio of any engine yet designed ( 4.18bhp per Kg). It also has probably the highest torque per litre (114 ft/lbs) and of course it was proved in Tuscan racing where some of the engines were only rebuilt after three years.
Just under 20 bar BMEP!I have been an engine designer for 40 years and I would like to think that I have not yet met my favourite engine. Engines are designed with a particular application in mind; for example a Formula 1 engine is for F1, it would be no use for anything else. Regarding sports car engines do we consider exotic, complicated, durability or do we just consider power? If we take the AJP8, it is a very simple engine, but it has the highest power to weight ratio of any engine yet designed ( 4.18bhp per Kg). It also has probably the highest torque per litre (114 ft/lbs) and of course it was proved in Tuscan racing where some of the engines were only rebuilt after three years.
Assuming competitive friction levels, and efficient combustion- that would assume a Volumetric efficiency of about 150-160%(if poor combustion is assumed perhaps 170%). For natural aspiration this is incredibly high. This is using the reference of ambient and NOT the intake manifold! It’s also being generous by assuming modest peak BMEP/torque speeds (3000-4500 rpm) If it IS a racing engine- then it is ALSO much more likely that the peak torque/BMEP and peak VE position in the rev range is either close or coincident with peak power. If this is the case- due to rising friction- the VEs he’s inferring are impossibly high. I don’t want to be a doubting Thomas and I want to stay open minded, however, it does push the boundaries of what I believe is possible. Sorry, 120-130% VE I may believe. Any dyno can show anything- whether the dyno is trustworthy and in line with more of the norm of the industry is another matter.
pistonlager said:
Good article.
Maybe the Top Gear producers should be looking at this story/forum.
Anyone else think that the TG format is a bit stale now.
I'm bored of watching caravans being destroyed and celebrity t**ts driving pieces of cr*p.
try this threadMaybe the Top Gear producers should be looking at this story/forum.
Anyone else think that the TG format is a bit stale now.
I'm bored of watching caravans being destroyed and celebrity t**ts driving pieces of cr*p.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I own a TVR griff, and for mr melling to have a go at a car that actually saved Tvr for such a long time which in turn gave him a job is at bit bang out of line........
I have seen the wildcat at rochdale, i wasnt impressed one bit and looks 'too' much of a kit car now, and to say he has improved the griffith, well the griff was designed near 20 years ago things have moved on mate, i could improve anything that was designed 20 years ago, its like FORD saying the new mondeo is an improvement on the old sierra.....no shi7!!!!!!!!!
The improvements are legislation rules anyway so they had to be done.........
At the time the griff won a council design award as well as getting hundreds of orders in the first year .......... Has mr melling had hundreds of orders...........I guess no where near
The first wildcat was a cut'n'shut ealy green griff shell. (I know i went to buy the rolling chassis)
If the AJP had faults have a look at the guy that designed it!!!!!!!!!!!
The wildcat will never be a classic either.....
That got that off my chest thank you and good night.
I have seen the wildcat at rochdale, i wasnt impressed one bit and looks 'too' much of a kit car now, and to say he has improved the griffith, well the griff was designed near 20 years ago things have moved on mate, i could improve anything that was designed 20 years ago, its like FORD saying the new mondeo is an improvement on the old sierra.....no shi7!!!!!!!!!
The improvements are legislation rules anyway so they had to be done.........
At the time the griff won a council design award as well as getting hundreds of orders in the first year .......... Has mr melling had hundreds of orders...........I guess no where near
The first wildcat was a cut'n'shut ealy green griff shell. (I know i went to buy the rolling chassis)
If the AJP had faults have a look at the guy that designed it!!!!!!!!!!!
The wildcat will never be a classic either.....
That got that off my chest thank you and good night.
Scuffers said:
no reason you can't charge betterys way faster, the issue is what from?
Think about how much energy needs to go into the battery. Think about how many amps you need to supply at 240V AC. Think about the efficiency of the charging process. Think about the excess heat generated. Can you imagine any sort of chemical reaction where sticking that amount of energy into it in 5 mins doesn't generate catastrophic amounts of heat?There's one fundamental reason in my mind why battery power won't win over H Fuel Cell and that's glamour.
Batteries are what you put in your torch to find the candles when there's a power cut.
Hydrogen fuel cells? crikey that's what goes into a sci fi spaceship to fight the klingons 3 galaxies away. I know what I'd rather have - spaceship over candles any day of the week
Irrespective of how megafab the battery technology is (and most of us don't care) , it will NEVER sound as good to the buying public!
Going back to the AJP power stuff, I had the original hp figures of the original melling engine, supplied to me from autocraft who got the figures from mcd. To say those dyno figures and what AM is saying in this interview are far removed is an understatement!
I like AM a lot, he's a real character and you don't get to be in his position by always being an arrogant man who talks rubbish, so there must be an element of genius about him .. but some of the things he says make you wonder if he shoudn't think twice, talk once - it rather seems he is his own worst enemy sometimes when it comes to PR, alienating hardcore Grifith owners (who are surely part of his target demographic for the Wildcat) is a little silly surely?
However having said that, I loved seeing the Wildcat at Autosport and hope that sales of the car are strong and it can re-establish a British sports car maker on the map once again. I have reservations over his interview techniques, but the engineering world would be poorer without colourful characters like AM
So on balance a from me.
Batteries are what you put in your torch to find the candles when there's a power cut.
Hydrogen fuel cells? crikey that's what goes into a sci fi spaceship to fight the klingons 3 galaxies away. I know what I'd rather have - spaceship over candles any day of the week
Irrespective of how megafab the battery technology is (and most of us don't care) , it will NEVER sound as good to the buying public!
Going back to the AJP power stuff, I had the original hp figures of the original melling engine, supplied to me from autocraft who got the figures from mcd. To say those dyno figures and what AM is saying in this interview are far removed is an understatement!
I like AM a lot, he's a real character and you don't get to be in his position by always being an arrogant man who talks rubbish, so there must be an element of genius about him .. but some of the things he says make you wonder if he shoudn't think twice, talk once - it rather seems he is his own worst enemy sometimes when it comes to PR, alienating hardcore Grifith owners (who are surely part of his target demographic for the Wildcat) is a little silly surely?
However having said that, I loved seeing the Wildcat at Autosport and hope that sales of the car are strong and it can re-establish a British sports car maker on the map once again. I have reservations over his interview techniques, but the engineering world would be poorer without colourful characters like AM
So on balance a
from me.Mars said:
NiallOswald said:
Mars said:
Batteries will never be any good. Fuel cells will prove to be more flexible in the long-run. I reckon fuel-cell tech will completely kill off all battery research in the next decade.
Why so? Hydrogen fuel cells are essentially a battery technology - got any energy density and cycle efficiency figures to support your claim?
Sure, for some people their usage is less predictable and more intensive and this wouldn't work, but I'll bet they're a fairly small proportion of all motorists.
carl_w said:
Scuffers said:
no reason you can't charge betterys way faster, the issue is what from?
Think about how much energy needs to go into the battery. Think about how many amps you need to supply at 240V AC. Think about the efficiency of the charging process. Think about the excess heat generated. Can you imagine any sort of chemical reaction where sticking that amount of energy into it in 5 mins doesn't generate catastrophic amounts of heat?
Think about how much energy needs to go into the battery. Think about how many amps you need to supply at 240V AC. Think about the efficiency of the charging process. Think about the excess heat generated. Can you imagine any sort of chemical reaction where sticking that amount of energy into it in 5 mins doesn't generate catastrophic amounts of heat?
It's a fair point that even if the battery can quite happily be recharged in a short time, a significant amount of power would be required to achieve it. Still, to recharge a Tesla-sized battery (40kWh) in 10 minutes you'd be looking at around 250-300kW - by no means outside the realms of possibility given a 'charging station' with an appropriate grid connection.
Obviously as battery capacity goes up (which it has to if EVs are going to be truly practical) battery-swap becomes increasingly appealing, and could actually provide a plus over liquid fuels by providing a virtually instant 'refuel' without even having to leave the car. It would also absolve the user of the responsibility for battery management and disposal, require less distributed infrastructure (i.e. charging points), even out battery usage patterns and be comfortingly familiar to drivers.
Edited by NiallOswald on Saturday 24th January 15:27
Scuffers said:
Mars said:
NiallOswald said:
Mars said:
Batteries will never be any good. Fuel cells will prove to be more flexible in the long-run. I reckon fuel-cell tech will completely kill off all battery research in the next decade.
Why so? Hydrogen fuel cells are essentially a battery technology - got any energy density and cycle efficiency figures to support your claim?no reason you can't charge betterys way faster, the issue is what from?
there are 'flow' batteryies that hold their charge in a liquid that flows though the bettery, so in theory you could use this and just exchange the fluid to re-charge, however, it's just as feasablle to have battery exchange or even battery to battery charging (so you can have the chargers battery on charge 24/7 from a low current supply, and then 'dump' this into the cars battery at speed)
the point is that without the development effort, none of these will take off, and all the money (from the oil companies) at the moment is into Hydrogen... Ask yourself why that would be?
Mars said:
Flow batteries are a type of fuel cell.
NiallOswald said:
Not so. They work in different ways and a clear distinction is usually made between the two. From an end-user point of view, they are very similar but what's going on inside is fundamentally different.
As said, they are nothing like a fuel cell, they are a chemical battery (in much the same way a lead/acid battery is)they are used commercially for load levelling or UPS work as they have very fast responce times and their capacity is not limited by the size of the battery but the volume of fluid.
If every car gets a Lithium ion battery bank in it, then we will need to find a new planet with sufficient Lithium, commodity prices are already stretching.
On board recharging using carbon fuels or in the future methanol is the answer to keep the battery bank reasonable.
There´s some criticism on this thread for Mr M, but you have to take your hat off to people who produce stuff that works on a shoestring and take on the mega bucks of Porsche in the spirit of the Merlin engine.
On board recharging using carbon fuels or in the future methanol is the answer to keep the battery bank reasonable.
There´s some criticism on this thread for Mr M, but you have to take your hat off to people who produce stuff that works on a shoestring and take on the mega bucks of Porsche in the spirit of the Merlin engine.
Great interview and fascinating to read AM's comments and those of others here.
I don't know all the AM has done, and can't vouch for how much he has been involved in various projects, but I do know from talking to him directly that he has worked with a large number of the major motor manufacturers. His problem is that he is not able to talk about what he has done for them as they, like organisations in many other industries, do not want people to think that they don't have the capabilities themselves to do certain design and development work, but instead rely on a bloke in Rochdale to do it for them.
He may not be modest, but if were an engine designer and had been for as long as he has and were asked about your favourite engines you would be implying that your own designs weren't good enough if you didn't include some of them. Add to that the type of comments made on here if he said "none of mine" and why would he?
I do wonder why people can't be supportive of talent - here is someone who has been successful in his chosen path for a long time, working with some of the best names out there, but people want to knock him down. I doubt he cares, but if you can't say you have done better then maybe accepting his success would be better than criticism. I would love to get full access to his records and see exactly what MCD have developed - I am sure it would be fascinating on lots of levels.
I don't know all the AM has done, and can't vouch for how much he has been involved in various projects, but I do know from talking to him directly that he has worked with a large number of the major motor manufacturers. His problem is that he is not able to talk about what he has done for them as they, like organisations in many other industries, do not want people to think that they don't have the capabilities themselves to do certain design and development work, but instead rely on a bloke in Rochdale to do it for them.
He may not be modest, but if were an engine designer and had been for as long as he has and were asked about your favourite engines you would be implying that your own designs weren't good enough if you didn't include some of them. Add to that the type of comments made on here if he said "none of mine" and why would he?
I do wonder why people can't be supportive of talent - here is someone who has been successful in his chosen path for a long time, working with some of the best names out there, but people want to knock him down. I doubt he cares, but if you can't say you have done better then maybe accepting his success would be better than criticism. I would love to get full access to his records and see exactly what MCD have developed - I am sure it would be fascinating on lots of levels.
Scuffers said:
Mars said:
Flow batteries are a type of fuel cell.
NiallOswald said:
Not so. They work in different ways and a clear distinction is usually made between the two. From an end-user point of view, they are very similar but what's going on inside is fundamentally different.
As said, they are nothing like a fuel cell, they are a chemical battery (in much the same way a lead/acid battery is)they are used commercially for load levelling or UPS work as they have very fast responce times and their capacity is not limited by the size of the battery but the volume of fluid.
Interesting reading here, including a good description of the distinction:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery
Wiki said:
Flow batteries are also distinguished from fuel cells by the fact that the chemical reaction involved is often reversible, i.e. they are generally of the secondary battery type and so they can be recharged without replacing the electroactive material. Also, an important factor in redox flow battery is that the power and energy density of the redox flow batteries are independent of each other in contrast to rechargeable secondary batteries.
To add to the confusion the European Patent Organisation classes redox flow cells (H01M8/18C4) as a sub-class of regenerative fuel cells (H01M8/18).
To add to the confusion the European Patent Organisation classes redox flow cells (H01M8/18C4) as a sub-class of regenerative fuel cells (H01M8/18).
Steve748 said:
pistonlager said:
Good article.
Maybe the Top Gear producers should be looking at this story/forum.
Anyone else think that the TG format is a bit stale now.
I'm bored of watching caravans being destroyed and celebrity t**ts driving pieces of cr*p.
try this threadMaybe the Top Gear producers should be looking at this story/forum.
Anyone else think that the TG format is a bit stale now.
I'm bored of watching caravans being destroyed and celebrity t**ts driving pieces of cr*p.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff