Slashdot Mirror


Practical Magnetic Levitating Transmission Gear System Loses Its Teeth

Zothecula writes: A new transmission device that uses magnetic levitation to almost completely eliminate friction and wear has been developed as part of the MAGDRIVE research project, a collaboration of seven European nations. The creation of the unit entailed the development of a magnetic gear reducer and corresponding frictionless magnetic axles. Aimed primarily for use in spacecraft due to its extended mechanical life, the system is also adaptable for use in automobiles, railways, and aircraft.

17 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. PBS had a documentary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    On 5-10 years back about classic cars from some museum in SoCal or something.

    The 3 primary vehicles they discussed were:
    A 1900s era Battery Powered car with a 25 mile range.
    A Steam powered car capable of 'gas-like' performance, given ample 'warmup' time.
    And a 1920s or 30s electrocoupled automatic transmission car that I believe used increasing rotational speed to more closely couple the engine to the output shaft (Can't remember if it also had gears or if the coupling mechanism doubled as the 'gears'.)

    Point being: So they're finally getting back to R&D on 'non-mechanical' coupling mechisms in modern vehicles. Yay! Only took like 90 years.

    1. Re:PBS had a documentary... by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If something has been abandoned for 90+ years with no significant advances in the area, it's probably for a reason.

      The upper limit on what such gearing could do is quite low. You're comparing a steel-pushing-steel scenario with one of trying to turn one magnetic wheel by pushing another near it. It's a loser except in ultra-specialist applications with exotic materials (Space? Fine. Your car? Unlikely).

      Battery powered cars have been around forever. UK milk floats were entirely battery powered for decades, delivering hundreds of pints of milk to every house in the local town - they just used lead acid batteries and charged overnight. If you ever got stuck behind one, you quickly (!) found out the limitations of the technology of the time. We've moved on from there now, but only very, very recently.

      Some huge trucks still have things based on variable transmission technology, so the entire gearbox doesn't have gears but just slides into the most convenient gearing automatically. They've been around for decades. And they work by using a strong belt that can slide up and down a conical shaft. I kid you not. Every few years, they are re-invented under another brand / patent / material and actually do quite a good job. But they are still considered specialist parts because we can't overcome their weaknesses.

      Wankel engines were still in mass production until very recently (I believe Mazda don't have newer models that still use them?). Again, they do everything you would want and were constantly reinventing themselves for decades.

      The problem is not that it's been done before. It's that it's been done an awful lot and not much more can be done that way. As such, although we have stronger room-temperature magnets, they aren't THAT much stronger. Superconducting magnets might be considered "new" but we can't make them practical yet - except in the absolute zero and vacuum of outer space.

      There's nothing wrong with going back to the old, but you have to add something new (e.g. the clockwork radio was hailed as genius because it took the old and made it do something "new").

      And I'm not sure this does that at all.

    2. Re:PBS had a documentary... by jafiwam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some huge trucks still have things based on variable transmission technology, so the entire gearbox doesn't have gears but just slides into the most convenient gearing automatically. They've been around for decades. And they work by using a strong belt that can slide up and down a conical shaft. I kid you not. Every few years, they are re-invented under another brand / patent / material and actually do quite a good job. But they are still considered specialist parts because we can't overcome their weaknesses.

      For someone asserting they know all kinds of "unknoiwn" details, you sure are behind.

      The description above is called a "Constant Velocity Transmission" and both Nissan (recently) and Subaru (since the 70's) have these. Subaru has had MOST of their new non-performance car fleet use CVTs for the last three years. Nisssan's CVT uses a "pusher" belt made of stacked plates connected by a chain. Subaru, a regular chain.

      This is not "specialists" parts anymore. This is just a different type of automatic transmission.

      True, "going back to the old" works sometimes, often that is because materials and engineering concepts have advanced far enough to actually make the stuff work now. That doesn't mean tinkering with, or taking another try at these old methods isn't worthwhile.

    3. Re:PBS had a documentary... by tom17 · · Score: 2

      The Corolla has CVT now too. It's getting pretty common out there in some mass-market cars.

      Also, on his other comment about Wankel engines, I believe that Mazda are re-introducing one. Just rumours now, but it's not necessarily dead yet.

    4. Re:PBS had a documentary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      If your car has a CVT, it's a "Continuously Variable Transmission". The gear ratio continously varies, hence the name.

      It's unrelated to the CV ("Constant Velocity") joints on the transaxle. Those are joints that maintain a constant velocity on the input and output shafts even though there is a bend in the middle, as opposed to a universal joint that has some change in angular momentum that varies based on the angle of the bend.

      dom

    5. Re:PBS had a documentary... by David_Hart · · Score: 2

      And unfortunately, this is why the reliability of the Nissan Pathfinder has become utter shit. I wanted to buy a 2014 model, but the horrific reviews of failing transmissions at 30k miles scared me and many others off. For good reason I might add.

      I had the 2013 Murano which came out with CVT. 2013-2015 models had CVT problems. Nissan has pretty much solved this and have since added the CVT to even more models. I did lose my transfer case when it was 8 years old and that is still a weak point today for the Murano.

      Its one of the reasons why I replaced it with a Jeep last year. The Jeep Grand Cherokee has an 8-speed transmission. The Cherokee now has a 9-speed transmission. At the time that I was researching the Jeep, ZF was saying that they were working on a 10-speed transmission. With that many shift points, they rival CVT in regards to being in the most efficient power band. Only time will tell if these transmissions will be more reliable than the CVT.

    6. Re:PBS had a documentary... by superdave80 · · Score: 2

      For someone asserting they know all kinds of "unknoiwn" details, you sure are behind.

      This coming from a guy that thinks CVT means "Constant Velocity Transmission"...

      CVT = Continuously Variable Transmission

  2. Might be a fit for EVs by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    It looks too bulky to provide a lot of gears in an automotive application, but if it could provide just two that you couldn't strip out no matter how much torque you put through them, it could be a really nice match for EVs. They would benefit from a transmission, but it's difficult for any transmission of a reasonable size to handle the output torque.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Might be a fit for EVs by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Actually it is a terrible idea for an EV. Magnetic material properties limit the amount of force you can transmit across an airgap,

      That is a feature. You're thinking in terms of a perfect world. I guess now we know what kind of cowardice you display, coward. You're afraid to think things through completely. Guess what? Torque converters slip sometimes, too.

      one of the great things about an electric motor is that you can accurately control the torque output. It is really the most pointless application for an overload safe transmission

      Again, you're not living in the real world, where EVs don't have multiple gears because they destroy transmissions when we try to use them with one more complicated than a simple reduction gear. See, the problem with torque control on an electric motor isn't how rapidly you can back off the power. It's how rapidly it comes on, and how much of it there is. When the motor applies its full torque, and there is some sort of binding or resistance, the transmission gets all of that torque right away. But energy from ICEs comes in squishy packets.

      It's a feature and not a problem that this transmission will slip slightly occasionally. It will only happen when you would otherwise have been at risk of breaking something.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Might be a fit for EVs by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Informative

      It looks too bulky to provide a lot of gears in an automotive application, but if it could provide just two that you couldn't strip out no matter how much torque you put through them, it could be a really nice match for EVs. They would benefit from a transmission, but it's difficult for any transmission of a reasonable size to handle the output torque.

      Electric cars don't need gears in the first place. The only reason we have gears in IC engines is because, 1. it would be expensive and hard to keep the engines in sync if you had a separate one for each wheel, 2. IC engines operate in most efficiently at very specific RPMs. Notice how the tachometer tends to hover around 2000 rpm as you shift gears? That's what the gears are for, to keep the engine at a constant RPM. Electric motors work just as efficiently at just about any RPM.

    3. Re:Might be a fit for EVs by fnj · · Score: 2

      An electric car does not have to have reduction gearing at all. In fact there are electric cars that do not. Repeat, do not. Believe it. In fact you can also do away completely with mechanical brakes.

      If Tesla and GM and Nissan and others were all too timid or conservative to do it right, that is their problem.

      Now who is wrong?

  3. Re:Efficiency??? by SharpFang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Way more efficient than gears for loads it's designed to handle - but it's not meant for heavy lifting; the "magnetic gears" will "slip" if the load is too high, and in this case "too high" is quite low (think force required to move two magnets oriented in "repulsing" way against each other).

    It would be great for stuff like stabilizing flywheels - things that once set in motion stay in motion for years, and may take a long time to spin up or stop. It would work well for things that require very little force, like reorienting the solar panels or aiming the antenna.

    OTOH, stuff like lander wheel bearings or drills for picking samples are better handled with normal bearings that can take much heavier loads.

    It's not a cure-all solution, it's just a good new option for specific applications. You won't use it to build a better crane but gyroscope flywheels could immensely benefit from that!

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  4. Re:Efficiency??? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Way more efficient than gears for loads it's designed to handle - but it's not meant for heavy lifting; the "magnetic gears" will "slip" if the load is too high, and in this case "too high" is quite low (think force required to move two magnets oriented in "repulsing" way against each other).

    If you couldn't move high forces with a transmission like this, then you also couldn't generate them with an electric motor, because you couldn't hope for the magnetic fields to turn the stator against high loads.

    OTOH, stuff like lander wheel bearings or drills for picking samples are better handled with normal bearings that can take much heavier loads.

    What happens when you put too much torque through a drill? You shatter your bit. What happens when you put too much torque through an axle? All kinds of exciting things can happen, check out some four wheeling videos. There's lots of reasons why some slip designed into the system is not an undesirable thing.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Re:Efficiency??? by Tyr07 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The question is, how much force can it handle? Large electro-mags can pick up entire cars. Sure, it's huge, but it's lifting up 2700 lbs+. Also the surface area is large because the objects surface area is large. If a really high powered small electro mag was used, it would just rip out that piece of metal.

    How many pounds of force can the small one withstand? It's possible using two small unpowered magnets to easily make one that could crush a hand if a hand was implace and restraints were let go on the mags.

    I imagine it could potentially with a little voltage withstand a lot of torque, and limited slip to prevent spin outs, it might be fantastic for rovers.
    They're often in lower gravity environments to begin with.

  6. Re:Efficiency??? by rgbatduke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The other point being that it could be designed only to replace the kinetic friction parts of a transmission, the parts that synchronize the system. The gearing itself can probably still be mechanical. Not having to replace clutch plates, for example, might be a nice and relatively easily doable thing.

    --
    Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
  7. FYI: Milk Float by camperdave · · Score: 2

    For the confused: A milk float is a small flatbed vehicle for delivering milk, and not an alternative name for a milkshake.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  8. Smoothing out diesel Aircraft engines? by chaim79 · · Score: 2

    This should really be looked at by those producing Diesel engines for Airplanes.

    The biggest problem tinker's face when trying to put a Diesel engine on an airplane is that the Diesel has very massive "power surges" each time a cylinder fires, and a nasty power "stall" when it's compressing a cylinder. This isn't a huge deal with the other applications of Diesel engines, they just add mass to the fly-wheel and transmission and that takes care of it. In Airplanes however, the mass costs too much (in terms of airplane weight) so they try to reduce it as much as possible, however if you reduce it too much the propeller is literally torn apart by the surges and stalls. Early tests had the propeller lasting only hours when running on a 4 or 6 cylinder diesel. If there is a reduction drive on it to bring the RPMs further down they too like to self destruct with a Diesel.

    If they could use a low-weight magnetic coupler to absorb the surges and stalls and provide smooth power that would solve the biggest problem putting a diesel on an airplane and would really boost that market!

    --
    DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
    AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
    Shakespeare invents 'your mom'