This week, diesel truck engine company Cummins made an unusual announcement. In addition to several new high-efficiency diesel engines, it also showed off an all-electric truck called the Concept Class 7 Urban Hauler EV. The truck is just a concept at the moment, but it's coming in the nick of time—just as Tesla is about to announce its own semi EV.
The 18,000-pound tractor cab, built by Roush, comes with a 140kWh battery and is capable of hauling a 22-ton trailer. According to Forbes, Cummins hopes to be able to sell its battery to truck and bus manufacturers by 2019. Forbes says the truck can run for 100 miles and be recharged in an hour, although Cummins is allegedly working on improving the battery so that by 2020, that recharge time is reduced to 20 minutes.
In a press release, Cummins also said that its EV would come with a diesel-engine generator that could extend the range of the battery to 300 miles, which would offer 50-percent fuel savings compared to straight diesel trucks.
Cummins' news comes just after Reuters reported that Tesla's electric semis will likely have a range of 200 to 300 miles and come with autonomous functions. The trucking industry is a major polluter, and electrification is seen as an important component in reducing greenhouse gases from that sector, in addition to implementing fuel efficiency measures.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by leftover on Friday September 01 2017, @03:44PM (21 children)
Even if all it does is buffer part-throttle moves, an advanced diesel-electric hybrid would be a significant improvement. Let the diesel run only at its best performance speed and loading, otherwise shut down. Capture braking energy, of course. Just avoid using the engine in low-RPM lugging and they don't need to cheat on emissions tests.
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 2) by fraxinus-tree on Friday September 01 2017, @04:02PM (17 children)
Heh. Diesel engines don't have throttle, so they don't suffer much from part-load efficiency loss. As for the emissions, the problem lies completely in the sub-100kW segment where the scale does not allow for the full-blown emission-reducing measures. The lorries are safe from that either. The hybrid advantages here are reduced to regenerative braking (does a lot more than in small cars) and using a cheaper energy than diesel. Well, they can run in quiet and emission-less mode in populated or noise-sensitive environment as well. Not bad.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 01 2017, @05:05PM (16 children)
"Heh. Diesel engines don't have throttle,"
Huh? WTF do you call that throttle-looking thing on the floor of the cab? You mash the throttle down to make the truck go. Maybe you have another name for it? Granted, diesels don't have a carburetor with a throttle body and throttle plate - they've always been fuel injected. But we still call it a throttle. If you're going to change the nomenclature, please give us some citations.
GP managed to make himself understood. When you mash down on that there pedal on the right side of the driver's seat, it sends fuel to the engine, and you go faster. That's how that works - pretty much the same as in any passenger car, with any type of motive power.
Now, before someone hops in to tell us that the throttle is really just a sending unit these days, which tells a computer that you want to go faster, we STILL call it a throttle. Nobody on the CB radio tells the world that he's pressing on his sending unit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throttle#Internal_combustion_engines [wikipedia.org]
A diesel engine does not have a throttle except there is a throttle valve on the newer diesel engines which is generally referred to as air management valves. Air management valves can be with or without integrated control electronics. Air management valves throttle the intake air in the intake air system of diesel engines via electromotive means in order to achieve precision controlled exhaust gas recirculation and prevent the inconvenient shaking that would otherwise occur when the engine is switched off.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 01 2017, @05:41PM (6 children)
" WTF do you call that throttle-looking thing on the floor of the cab?"
The accelerator pedal, dumbass. Diesels have blowers and fuel injector racks, not throttles.
Oh, since you're so stupid, it's not a gas pedal either. Diesels don't burn gas.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 01 2017, @10:00PM
Found the real Nazi!
.
.
.
.
.
.
**Too soon?
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday September 02 2017, @12:47AM (4 children)
Now you can answer a layman's question: I've driven only a few diesel vehicles such as cargo vans and box trucks(F-450 or E-350 panel van). Does all diesel acceleration feel sluggish and spongy compared to gasoline engines in similar vehicle classes?
I know people who swear by diesels such as Ram 2500s and Power-Stroked F-series, but knowing those people I'm wondering if they do it just because muh midwest rather than any real benefit at that vehicle size.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 02 2017, @03:06AM (1 child)
Diesels suffer from poor low-end power because compression eats up a bigger portion of the inertia from the flywheel, which of course develops more the faster it turns.
Did you know the Luftwaffe actually used diesel engines on some aircraft? Notably, The Ju-86P1 high-altitude recon plane used supercharged Jumo 207 diesels at great altitudes.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday September 02 2017, @03:43AM
Messerschmidt 252 or GTFO.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 02 2017, @03:37AM
I dunno if "sluggish and spongy" refers to turbo lag? Or just big, slow-shifting automatic transmissions? If so, yeah, turbos have lag, and "big" trucks and vans (other than the real big trucks, with synchronous manual transmissions) do tend to have those transmissions regardless of engine; you won't find a lot of naturally-aspirated diesels on the road because they have lousy power-to-weight ratio, but at least passenger cars and whatnot tend to come with quicker transmissions (for diesel or gas engines) than the big ones.
Anyway, for direct experience, I've spent substantial time behind the wheels of an F-250 with the "5.0l" Windsor V8, and an F-350 with the 7.3l Power Stroke. Not really the same vehicle class (even further than the model numbers suggest, as the F-250 is a normal pickup, where the F-350 is a full-fat extended-cab dually beast), but the engines are pretty much proportional. If you're accelerating from a stop, where the transmission doesn't come into it, you can definitely note a bit of turbo lag on the diesel. But if you punch it while cruising (e.g. to overtake), you won't even notice the turbo lag, because they both have automatic transmissions that like to take a moment to look around and figure out what's going on before they'll downshift. But once you're finally in the right gear, and/or the turbo is spun up, acceleration really feels about the same.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 03 2017, @03:06AM
All turbocharged vehicles have that sluggish and spongy feel. It is a consequence of the design and the reason why low-rpm applications use superchargers instead. But trucks and high-rpm applications use turbochargers despite the "lag" because they are more efficient and reliable at the operating levels.
(Score: 4, Informative) by CCTalbert on Saturday September 02 2017, @02:10AM (8 children)
You're kind of missing the context/meaning of this.
Typically, Diesel engines don't really throttle the air entering the engine- the power output is regulated by how much fuel is injected. The "gas pedal" is in no way connected to something "throttling" the airflow. Gas engines require this (even if it is computer controlled versus mechanical).
This is one of the efficiency advantages that a Diesel has- the engine isn't continuously working drawing a vacuum, so that "pumping loss" is eliminated. At idle and part throttle there is excess air, essentially it is just compressed and then expanded, sort of like a spring- in a perfect no friction world (which of course doesn't exist) there is no cost for this.
Your "effective compression ratio" is (ignoring all those different real work issues) always the same. (And the higher the compression ratio the more energy you extract from expanding the combustion products = higher efficency.)
In comparison, a gas engine with a throttle restricts the air so the engine expends extra work drawing this air in -> pumping losses. This takes energy and you've lost efficiency. And at idle and part throttle your effective compression ratio is lower- so less energy is extracted. And to make it all worse, at idle and light throttle you need a richer mixture to ensure reliable ignition and combustion- another efficiency hit.
A huge difference is seen at idle- Diesels idle very efficiently- in comparison a gas engine uses much more fuel just sitting at idle. A gasoline engine is most efficient under heavy load. This is why newer cars shutting off and re-starting at stoplights improves mileage and reduces emissions.
Having said all of that- most modern diesels have "throttles" that are used for specific purposes- at shutdown if you don't shut off the air the engine tends to shudder rather alarmingly; there are different strategies used for partial reductions of air to manage emissions and in conjunction with some exhaust gas re-circulation (again emission related). As such they're not even referred to as throttles- for example my TDI has a "anti shudder valve".
Excepting VWs shenanigans, a modern Diesel engine is a rather remarkably refined device for extracting energy from burning fuel.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday September 02 2017, @04:08AM (7 children)
I'll add that gasoline engine operation requires a precise mix of fuel to air to sustain combustion ( stoichiometric ratio ). This was first done by carburetion, but later fuel injectors were more precise and had the ability to adjust on-the-fly, closed loop to compensate for variations so precise combustion ratios could be maintained over all operating conditions. Hence, the "oxygen sensor", used to zero in on the fine line between "too much" gasoline, and "not enough", for the air admitted to the engine via the throttle plate.
The "throttle position sensor" and "mass air-flow sensor" give the vehicle's computer enough info for a pretty good estimate, but that estimate will always be trimmed with internal tables maintained by the computer with historical values required to achieve complete combustion as verified by the "oxygen sensor". When things get too far out of line... that's when that little red "check engine" light turns on, and some people end up with a nasty repair bill.
Diesels... they always run lean. In my diesel van, the air path is wide open from the air cleaner to the air intake manifold. I have a high pressure mechanical injection pump, gear driven from the engine, which sends a squirt of fuel to each cylinder, via an injector - one for each cylinder - at the appropriate time. The amount of fuel delivered per squirt is set by a little lever on the side of the injection pump, which is connected by a control cable to the accelerator pedal.
There are adjustments on the pump which set timing advance/retard, max and idle fuel delivery setpoints.
Now, some people goose up their injection pump to squirt more fuel into the engine, thinking it gives them more power. I flat won't do this. All it does is put more fuel into the cylinder than I have air to burn it with, with the result of producing substantial quanties of black smoke, as there is not enough oxygen to burn off the carbon.. the hydrogens get the oxygen first, leaving the carbon behind. Hence, you often see diesels spouting off prodigious amounts of black smoke when accelerating from stops. Very commonly seen as truckers try to get back up to speed after being stopped at traffic lights. That black smoke is just an indicator you have more fuel than air... so you get to pay for fuel... make a mess in the air.... and benefit nobody. I have my pump adjusted so I do not go into this region... I hate black smoke as much as everyone else.
But the flip side of continuously having a surplus of air for combustion is the production of nitrous oxides, especially on a hot engine. A lean-burning diesel is going to put out very little CO or HC, but will put out NOx. And that's what all this stuff about Blue Def and urea treatments are for... and from what I can tell what the emissions fuss is all about. I note my van seems to run quite clean as far as emissions until I load the engine heavily.... most noticeable if jackrabbit driving during stop and go traffic. I have at times had to "floor it", but I really *hate* do do so.
So far, I have been quite puzzled over the NOx furor. Isn't it NOx that is atmospherically produced during thunderstorms, with the resulting rainwater carrying the now biologically available nitrogen to the soil? Plants cannot get to the nitrogen in the air until that nitrogen is linked to oxygen ( nitrates ) or hydrogen ( ammonia, urea ). Some plants ( legumes ) even have nodes of bacteria in their roots that do this. From what I can tell, I am doing the plants a favor by emitting biologically available nitrogen.... something commonly applied to crops if it was called a "nitrate fertilizer". Certainly do not want the levels of NOx too high ( H2O + NO2 -> H2NO3 aka "Nitric Acid" .... ummm best not to breathe that stuff in high concentrations, and erodes alkali stuff like concrete at even low levels. ).
Its just part of the chemistry physics of diesel engine operation. I believe the higher pressure operation of turbocharging will only exacerbate this effect ( I am not turbo). I believe that this was what all that Volkswagen emissions fiasco was all about... as they tried to meet requirements with "creative financing", which did nothing but obfuscate everything so they could get approvals.
I would use a urea reactor on the van exhaust should I find a low TCO unit... sure wish some hacking group will show how to make one that runs on pee, or sans that, inexpensive fertilizer-grade urea that can be re-used as fertilizer when its use as an exhaust cleaner is spent. I am really fed up with being forced to buy and dispose of "hazardous wastes". Can't this stuff be made so its useful to plants when its life as a exhaust filter is done?
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by fraxinus-tree on Saturday September 02 2017, @06:29AM (2 children)
NOx is good for agriculture, but very bad for people breathing it. Cars produce it a lot in densely populated areas and less in farmlands. So, generally, it is bad. And no, you cannot use pee instead of urea solution. You cannot pee that much urea.
As for fertilizer part, I found it actually cheaper (here in Bulgaria) to buy truck-grade "ad blue" urea solution than fertilizer-grade urea. I used it for de-icing instead of salt, because it ended up in landlord's garden afterwards.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 02 2017, @02:24PM (1 child)
NOx are not particularly bad for people to breathe -- the real problem is that they react with other pollutants to form ozone. See photochemical smog. [wikipedia.org] But you're absolutely right about the distribution problem.
Since smog is mainly a problem in urban areas, I like to envision a world where diesels could run high temperatures, and thus high efficiency, out on the highway, and cut back when they enter town; the difficulty is in implementing it. You can hardly rely on even well-meaning drivers to flip a switch every time, and nobody wants a vehicle that uses GPS to decide whether or how well it's going to run.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 03 2017, @12:20AM
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is harmful when we breathe it. Nitric oxide (NO) and nitrous oxide (N2O), not so much.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday September 02 2017, @08:27AM (3 children)
Not sure what you're doing, but DEF isn't disposed of, it goes out the exhaust as water, CO2, and N2. It's also not hazardous.
VW's problem was they wanted to avoid adding a urea system to their cars and so gain a bit of an advantage over non--cheating manufacturers.
You actually answered your own question. We don't want concentrations of nitric acid in the air of our cities and roadways.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday September 02 2017, @10:41AM (2 children)
Thanks... my old van does not use DEF, but I know the newer diesels require it, and WalMart has shelf-fulls of it.
I guess (NH2)2CO + NOx -> N2 + CO2 + H2O one way or the other...
Maybe some sort of catalyst involved? I know the exhaust can get pretty hot if I am towing. This is something I have not looked too much into yet, but have an interest in retrofitting if I can do it cheaply and not affect the machine's reliability.
Thought some chemistry hacker might come up with a reactor I pee in once in a while to replenish the urea... albeit I would have to clean it out once in a while because other salts are also involved.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday September 03 2017, @01:52AM (1 child)
There is a catalyst, but I don't know what it is. I imagine using urine rather than somewhat pure urea would foul the reactor in short order.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Sunday September 03 2017, @05:24AM
I guess I am typical ol' farm boy... trying to find a use for everything.
Waste not, want not, or so some say.
I appreciate your observations... sure gives me a lotta help when I am likely to do something I'll soon regret.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday September 01 2017, @05:36PM (1 child)
This isn't a hybrid.
No engine, no diesel tanks, and not made by Cummings. Its just a big battery with electric drive tractor that can pull standard trailers, (and won't bet any benefit from brake energy re-capture from the trailer's brakes).
Because it's Cummings and all they know is Internal Combustion Engines, they have no particular skills in terrestrial electric drive, don't be surprised to see them sneak a recharging motor onto these things.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by EvilSS on Friday September 01 2017, @06:17PM
So yes engine (driving the generator in this case) and yes diesel tank.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday September 02 2017, @03:41AM
There's a reason (or several) why they've used Diesel-Electric in locomotives for decades...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 01 2017, @05:18PM (8 children)
They are talking about an 18,000 pound tractor, and a 44,000 pound trailer. That only adds up to 62,000 pounds, unless they are using "New Math". So, this is obviously not a full-fledged class 8 truck. Which makes me ask, "Why a trailer?" Apparently, it's a delivery truck - thus the "Urban Hauler". I suppose it might find a place in Coke, Pepsi, Cisco and similar fleets. It seems that they might sell more of their trucks in a straight truck configuration. 300 miles is kinda short range for most of the fleets that use trailers. Not extremely short, but some routes may need to be changed to make it worthwhile.
To kind of put that in perspective, commercial drivers aren't required to maintain a logbook if they don't drive more than 100 miles from their home terminal. Those drivers often drive more than 500 miles in a day. Almost all of them CAN be rerouted so that no route is 300 miles long, but there will be some juggling involved.
On the plus side, for electrics, one article I've read suggested that the company have multiple trucks for each driver. He makes a short run of 200 miles or so, comes back, and climbs in another electric truck, already loaded and ready to go, and drives another couple hundred miles. That sounds like a big investment for the trucking companies though.
(Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Friday September 01 2017, @05:47PM
They only stated it was Class 7. They claim electric drive does not make sense for Class 8 - see Forbes link.
So think Ford F750 [ford.com] usually married to a specific dedicated rear package (box truck, garbage truck, etc).
Class 7 can be (and Ford does make) a tractor for small trailers on this size vehicle often used for in-city deliveries.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday September 01 2017, @06:10PM (3 children)
Given the cost of the cabs, having to switch is not great.
When I see the giant gas tanks easily accessible on trucks, I always wonder about making batteries in that format (a giant D-cell, essentially), and swapping them at various stops that the truck has to make to refill payload (or even a twenty-minute detour, if the gas savings offset the driver pay). You could literally have a business charging those smaller batteries and meeting the trucks where they need them along their route.
For the articulated small "beer" trailers, which are branded and not commodity, or the refrigerated trailers, did someone update the math of putting solar panels on the roof? In AZ, their weight may be offset by the kWh generated, either for the truck or for the facility the trailer plugs into.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday September 02 2017, @03:44AM (2 children)
In Arizona they might barely make sense, with an ROI somewhere in the 5 year range.
Solar panels just can't collect that much power in a vehicle format, the vehicle doesn't intersect enough solar radiation to make it attractive - this scales all the way from dragonfly drones up to semi trucks. Now, the ISS - that's a little different, no energy required to stay in orbit, big panels, no aero-drag...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Sunday September 03 2017, @04:21AM (1 child)
Not as main power for trucks, but we're slowly getting there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Solar_Challenge [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday September 03 2017, @04:47AM
Key word: "Slowly." This has been the watchword of solar powered vehicles since the 1970s. Yes, progress, no - can't change the ratio between aero-drag of a reasonably shaped vehicle and the amount of solar radiation it receives.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Some call me Tim on Friday September 01 2017, @06:34PM
Don't forget the UPS and FedEx local fleets. Even some of the hub to local distribution centers could benefit. Truck arrives, plug it in while it's being unloaded/re-loaded. Now that I think about, my local hub is five miles from the airport and most of the incoming/outgoing stuff goes by air.
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday September 02 2017, @08:35AM (1 child)
It likely makes a lot of sense for the local leg of deliveries from air, rail, and shipping terminals.
That is likely why they called at an "urban hauler".
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday September 02 2017, @09:20AM
On a related note, I remember a time, maybe the late 80's, when quasi-official doctrine was that over the road trucking would end soon. The vision was, freight would be moved by rail and by ship, and the only trucking would be local/regional deliveries.
Alas, the United States can't run a rail system efficiently, so their vision isn't going to happen anytime soon.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday September 01 2017, @06:32PM (3 children)
I expect the electric motor can make more torque at low speeds, then a direct Diesel engine.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday September 02 2017, @04:35AM (2 children)
Especially between 0 and 5MPH, when other means of torque transmission involve tremendous losses in efficiency in the "torque converter", which ends up as heat, necessitating things like "transmission coolers".
I know my diesel van generates copious amounts of transmission heat when being run in stop-and-go traffic. Especially if towing. Once I can get up to speed and "lock the torque converter", everything runs much more efficient. I believe this is why I get something like 12MPG when constantly stop/go, but run aroung 25 to 30 MPG if I am running about 60 MPH on an uncongested freeway.
Each stop mandates just that much more fuel consumption.
Which really leads me to try to state most emphatically just how important it is to synchronize our traffic lights. Its obvious to a mechanic how poorly an engine runs if the timing is off; the same thing happens on a far larger scale when stoplights are poorly timed. I believe we need "smart intersections", where cameras feed computers, using image recognition of that which is in and approaching an intersection to make optimal decisions of when to switch the lights. Maybe this is already being done somewhere else, but a lot of what I see around where I live is terribly sub-optimal.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 02 2017, @05:22AM (1 child)
Some places deliberately de-synchonise traffic lights. They claim it slows traffic and makes things safer. In my opinion they are idiots.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday September 02 2017, @11:06AM
The most efficient system I have seen so far is the speed limit radar signage my city has installed on several of our main drags... if you exceed the speed limit, the thing begins brightly flashing an LED sign saying "Slow Down!" along with what it measures your speed to be. Once in a while a cop is parked within view of it, but we never know where the cop is. But we all know if he sees it, its reason for a nailing.
We all know its there. And why its there. And I think most of us actually want it there.
The neighboring city to our north deliberately sets the traffic lights to snarl up the traffic. Sure is wasteful. That kind of stuff penalizes ALL of us for the sins of a very few.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by https on Friday September 01 2017, @07:11PM (3 children)
Thanks to VW et al, why should anyone trust anything a diesel manufacturer has to say about their engines?
Offended and laughing about it.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 01 2017, @11:55PM (2 children)
Aldi sold horse meat. We can't shop at grocery stores.
Wells Fargo opened fake accounts. We can't use banks anymore.
Chipotle gave people E-coli. No more burritos.
And the list goes on.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday September 02 2017, @03:46AM (1 child)
I gave up banks and fast food over a decade ago....
Never did shop at Aldi - don't like grocery stores much in general, but there's not a good alternative. Banks lost out to credit unions in my book early on. Fast food lost its appeal around age 25 or so.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 03 2017, @04:43PM
And the list goes on. And on. And on. And...