My ultimate EV dream - inductive charging

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

I would think the primary use-case for in-road inductive charging would be Boring tunnels.

Logical!

Have not checked, do they already have it in their plans for these tunnels? Tho I don't think there is none of Tesla units that are inductive charging capable.

Sponsored

 

[mongo]

I would think the primary use-case for in-road inductive charging would be Boring tunnels.

I think putting pads at the pickup/ drop-off parking spots or (if needed) at a designated charge/service depot would be more efficient than lining the tunnel.
If energizing the full tunnel, why have a (larger than a couple kWh) battery?

 

[CyberGus]

I think putting pads at the pickup/ drop-off parking spots or (if needed) at a designated charge/service depot would be more efficient than lining the tunnel.
If energizing the full tunnel, why have a (larger than a couple kWh) battery?

My back-of-napkin math says that 11kWh charging would be insufficient to keep the vehicles in full-time service.

But you make an even better argument for energized tunnels: the robotaxis within could be made significantly cheaper.

 

[CyberGus]

Wireless!

 

[mongo]

My back-of-napkin math says that 11kWh charging would be insufficient to keep the vehicles in full-time service.

But you make an even better argument for energized tunnels: the robotaxis within could be made significantly cheaper.

Yeah, depends on duty cycle and what inductive charger supplies.
40 kWh pack @ 5 miles/ kWh = 200 miles, at 40 MPH, that's 5 hours with average draw of 8 kW
Image above shows 19 kW, call it 16kW, so 80 miles of range per hour of charge
With <66% drive time, vehicle stays charged
With 90% drive time, it loses 28 miles of range per hour or 5.6 kWh, and can go 7 hours before running out of charge.

 

[yohst]

However perfect inductive/resonance charging may get, air transfer losses will always be greater than difect copper. Wireless charging may be needed for the robo taxi but makes much less sense for home use imho. Plugging in is easy and takes only seconds. Yes wireless is more convenient but i for one don’t like to give that money to cover the efficiency loss to the power company.

 

[mongo]

However perfect inductive/resonance charging may get, air transfer losses will always be greater than difect copper. Wireless charging may be needed for the robo taxi but makes much less sense for home use imho. Plugging in is easy and takes only seconds. Yes wireless is more convenient but i for one don’t like to give that money to cover the efficiency loss to the power company.

The vehicle's charger already has an air gapped transformer though. This shifts its location, form factor and operating mode.

 

[yohst]

The vehicle's charger already has an air gapped transformer though. This shifts its location, form factor and operating mode.

For home charging you'd want all your charge be as effective as possible (at least thats what I want). A direct copper connection is always more efficient than anything else (well you can go pure silver and do a bit better but that ... never mind). If however, one needs on the go charging without anyone touching anything, wireless is what you want.

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

Induction charging at home is not solving anything.

Should be most useful in condos, apartments and commercial establishments if as many in common parking areas.

Again, best case if our main roads are embedded with it.

Non Tesla chargers are hassle to connect and Tesla ones in busy cities are mostly full.

 

[mongo]

For home charging you'd want all your charge be as effective as possible (at least thats what I want). A direct copper connection is always more efficient than anything else (well you can go pure silver and do a bit better but that ... never mind). If however, one needs on the go charging without anyone touching anything, wireless is what you want.

But there isn't a direct copper connection between your house AC and the battery pack.

 

[Woodrick]

However perfect inductive/resonance charging may get, air transfer losses will always be greater than difect copper. Wireless charging may be needed for the robo taxi but makes much less sense for home use imho. Plugging in is easy and takes only seconds. Yes wireless is more convenient but i for one don’t like to give that money to cover the efficiency loss to the power company.

You do know that the power company doesn't have direct copper from the transmission lines to your house, don't you? They go through a transformer and are inductively transferred to your local copper.

The use of wireless robotaxi charging for even home use is important. The car can go around and pick the kids up and no one has to remember to plug it in.

 

[yohst]

You do know that the power company doesn't have direct copper from the transmission lines to your house, don't you? They go through a transformer and are inductively transferred to your local copper.

The use of wireless robotaxi charging for even home use is important. The car can go around and pick the kids up and no one has to remember to plug it in.

Yes I do. I guess my "direct copper" remark isn't understood to apply just in the context of wireless power transfer. _if_ one is talking about having some inductive coupled connection _in the home_ to the car, it is never going to be as lossless as "direct copper" i.e., the cable we use right now. Thats all I was replying to.

So however power gets to your house (with whatever losses), you wouldn't want to incur additional losses to transfer power to your car just for convenience - though that is of course a matter of preference. You may place higher priority on "not having to remember to plug it in", I place priority on "not losing 30% or more in power/cost".

In a different situation such as the taxi, one could imagine the company owning such taxis don't want to have to manually plugin (labor costs, not automated etc.) and rather incur a transfer lose through a wireless charging method but then have a better fleet power management.

Hope its all good clear :-D

 

[CyberGus]

I place priority on "not losing 30% or more in power/cost".

No one should accept a 30% penalty. Fortunately, Elon has stated that the Tesla induction charging efficiency is +90%.

 

[Woodrick]

Yes I do. I guess my "direct copper" remark isn't understood to apply just in the context of wireless power transfer. _if_ one is talking about having some inductive coupled connection _in the home_ to the car, it is never going to be as lossless as "direct copper" i.e., the cable we use right now. Thats all I was replying to.

So however power gets to your house (with whatever losses), you wouldn't want to incur additional losses to transfer power to your car just for convenience - though that is of course a matter of preference. You may place higher priority on "not having to remember to plug it in", I place priority on "not losing 30% or more in power/cost".

In a different situation such as the taxi, one could imagine the company owning such taxis don't want to have to manually plugin (labor costs, not automated etc.) and rather incur a transfer lose through a wireless charging method but then have a better fleet power management.

Hope its all good clear :-D

You evidently didn't read my Post #11 in this thread.

You may be barking up a tree with nothing in it. Who said 30% loss.

Sponsored