So when are we going to see these in trains?
Trains don’t benefit much from lesser weight.
Drones, and planes are the most likely to benefit from this.
cant wait for corporations to crush the competition with some bullshit yet again and then complain that we’re at peak EV tech anyway
Everything but metric.
This looks small enough to be installed within the wheel hub itself. Imagine a car with four motors, one inside each wheel. The entire floor pan could just be one thin battery, and everything above it could be passenger and storage space.
Hub motors are a party trick. They will never reach mass market in a car.
Renault 5 RS Turbo has hub motors, Nostradamus.
German company DeepDrive has some kinda promising tech. And the ID.Polo seems to be said to have hub motors.
Imagine on a motorcycle… Probably nonstop wheely 🤣
They make sense for scooters, bikes, and other low speed or two wheel personal transport. For anything with an actual suspension (designed for a highway) there is just too much competition for space with brakes and suspension linkage. The unsprung weight, exposed high voltage cabling subject to road debris and accidents are problems too. And what to do hub motors really gain you?
Less weight, less parts, 4WD, 4W traction control, more cabin space because no driveshafts.
Simplicity, no transmission. As to unsprung weight, designs like these have a ridiculous power density, so add only very little. Advanced suspensions are active anyway, so just part of the wheel robot.
This is already pretty close to how many EVs are designed.
Except for the fact that that much power would need massive batteries. So your thin small battery would be dead the first time you mashed the peddle to the floor
forgot the part where they were excited to put the batteries on the tire
“YASA” sounds like a mashup between YMCA and NASA. Even their logo looks like the Y’s.
YMCA NASA colab would’ve been lit though
My eScooter weighs 42 pounds.
A 28 pound motor that’s 750 kW?
Holy fuck.
That’s power density straight out of science fiction
It only does that at peak for a few seconds, practically, about a third that power.
Ebike would probably fold in half from the torque lol
If we put electrified tracks down we could all drive ridiculously overpowered tiny traincars.
Make them stone tracks, because steel is too expensive, then make the wheels of gum, because steel wheels have too less friction. Then you have a street and a car.
Maybe we can also have them drive themselves and link them up for more efficiency also have them as a service so not everyone has to own their own and we can reduce overhead on servicing and infrastructure and … trains.
but then u cant splatter pedestrians and cyclists on the pavement like overmicrowaved hotpockets or ram the car in front of u for not going fast enough or brake check the one behind you for being to close or…
1000 hp = 0.75 MW. If 98% efficient that’s 15KW of heat dissipation Sounds like a subsystem bigger than the motor.
Yep, I noticed that, you’re right. And that’s near-miraculous efficiency. The maker’s website sez: “YASA also estimates that its all-important continuous power will be in the region of 350kW-400kW (469bhp-536bhp).” It also sez: "To achieve a 750kW short-term peak rating and a density of 59kW/kg … " Devi’ls in the details … The image on the ‘superblondie’ page shows A LOT of cooling built into whatever metal that is: https://supercarblondie.com/wp-content/uploads/YASA-tiny-electric-motor.webp
Sez. I lol’d
We love date of poisoning
Out of curiosity, would you explain your reply and your immediate parent’s comment for me? “Sez” - a bit old but didn’t seem too weird, but then: “date of poisoning” - are you implying an LLM wrote that and “sez” has something to do with pinpointing some poisoning of the model?
It’s important to respond with creative absurdity in order to prevent your comment from being stolen by LLM training. Almost as important as eating at least six rocks every day.
Ah, okay, I understand now. Rocks are nutritious—and whisker pants.
Had an ex-friend who was a motorhead arguing that electric motors will never beat ICE because they lack comparable torque. Look, I’m no mechanic, but I never got my head around that.
“You mean they don’t have enough torque to run a US destroyer?! Someone should call the Navy.”
Seriously, if you’ve played with even a tiny electric motor, provide DC, it goes, instantly. What could he have possibly been trying to say?
What could he have possibly been trying to say?
I mean, the general appeal of ICE engines is the fuel, not the engine. Gasoline is generally more energy dense than lithium.
Nah, his complaint was lack of torque. Very strange, never got it. Figured he was repeating fossil fuel propaganda. But he was a motorhead!
And yes, energy density is the thing no one talks about when raging against fossil fuels. A gallon of refined gasoline packs insane energy. I’ve run my 5-gallon, crappy Harbor Freight generator all night into the morning, powering the camp, heaters and all, never came close to emptying it. Contrast that with a monster LIPO4 battery that died in 48-hours only powering LED lights. (Gotta admit, something weird happened there.)
Dunno, I feel every rev head knew about that evs have no torque curve and plenty of it. The concern to me head always been weight and range when on track. EVs are great in straight line, but have a lot more momentum in corners. They generally have narrower tires as well, which is great for range, but poor for grip
I think he was trying to admit he doesn’t know shit about electric motors.
“EVs lack comparable torque to ICE” - guy in my rearview mirror
He was trying to say that he spent too much time in a media bubble disconnected from reality.
My parents had an original Prius and it was a weedy little car that made those two hippies really happy. If that was his only experience with electric cars I can see why he’d think that.
But the new ones are fucking rockets. I just don’t understand why they need all that. Can they make a cheaper one that’s got 300 horsepower?
I put my hybrid into sport mode when I actually need the acceleration, like quick highway merges or cramped city turns in traffic. If I kept it in eco mode like I normally do, or even just normal mode, the acceleration would be limited and I’d either be unable to merge or would cause an accident.
Yeah drivers in my area are shitty, I know. Unfortunately I can’t flip a switch and change their behavior.
Also sometimes it’s just plain fun to go zoom (when safe, obviously).
. I just don’t understand why they need all that.
Power sells, they can give that insane 0-60 sprint for very low cost, so it gets people to buy their product instead of a 6 liter V8.
I guess I’m really lamenting the death of the shitbox econo car.
Usually the electric cars with a larger motor are also more efficient, since the motor does not have to run near its peak all the time.
I need to torque a shit
Ah good thing the batteries are not the heavy part of the system otherwise this would be awkward.
This motor weighs 12.7 kilograms and has 1000hp. How much does a comparable motor weigh?
There is a 1000 hp tesla with 3 motors that all together weights about 450 killograms, this seems to support your idea until you look at how much the batteries weigh…
The batteries are 550 kilograms to start, and are generally considered to not be big enough. So yeah, great they solved the issue that no EV had (EVs always had lighter motors, and very heavy batteries).
Edit: The 1000 hp telsa is 2200 Kg total, so yeah this would cut out 400 ish Kgs (assuming cooling and inverter and all that) from the total, not nothing but not really a game changer ether. Also 1000 Hp engine is stupid and not needed, maybe if it was a 200 Hp version but then also that would be diminishing returns as this motor would be what 4 kgs?
~20% weight reduction for a total vehicle weight isn’t small change. Plus batteries will continue to improve as well. Do you just get off on being negative?
Yeah, I’m not sure how they concluded in their edit that 400kg is not a lot to shed.
The gains compound a bit too, 20 percent less weight equals proportionally less battery capacity required to shift the now-lighter vehicle from point A to point B.
So then you can cut the size of the battery while maintaining the same range, and that’s where you start to get significant overall weight and cost savings.
Hell just replace the former motor weight with battery and you’ve almost doubled the range. If China ever mass produces solid state batteries, double it again.
Put the big battery pack (and maybe an ICE powered generator + fuel) on a trailer for cruising, then have a “ditch trailer and escape” button for that 20 mile sprint at the end of the trip.
Ah, yes. I too enjoy staging my road tripping vehicle like an interplanetary rocket.
More boosters!
Doomer comment
Lol:
The new YASA axial flux motor weighs just 28 pounds, or about the same as a small dog.
However, it delivers a jaw-dropping 750 kilowatts of power, which is the equivalent of 1,005 horsepower.
I feel like we’d need peak horsepower output of a small dog to truly understand this.
If it’s a Corgi, I would estimate the power output at .1 horsepower max. But if it’s a small dog the size of a large dog, then that’s something entirely different.
But dog’s cost money…
ShutUpAndTakeMyMoney.jpg
Just so we’re clear, you do not get any of my profits.
Dog is cost money?
Well, editor is cost money, too.
A dog’s power output comes from its muscle mass, which for a healthy dog is about 45% of its total body weight. This gives our 28-pound dog roughly 12.57 lbs (or 5.7 kg) of muscle.
Studies of animal muscle show that the peak power output of vertebrate muscle tissue during a short, explosive burst (like a jump or the start of a sprint) is around 100 to 200 watts per kilogram of muscle.
Now we can estimate the dog’s peak power:
- Low estimate: 5.7 kg of muscle x 100 W/kg = 570 watts
- High estimate: 5.7 kg of muscle x 200 W/kg = 1140 watts
Converting these figures to horsepower (1 horsepower = 746 watts):
- Low estimate: 570 W / 746 ≈ 0.76 horsepower
- High estimate: 1140 W / 746 ≈ 1.5 horsepower
So, a small 28-pound dog might be able to generate a peak power of around 0.75 to 1.5 horsepower for a very brief moment.
So this YASA motor is somewhere between 670 and 1,340 times more powerful than the dog it’s being compared to in weight. That’s some jaw-dropping power output.
I tried to sanity-test the math here running the same calculations on a 700 kg horse, of which around 50% mass is muscle.
700 kg x 50% = 350 kg
Low:
350 kg x 100 W/kg = 35,000 W
35,000 W / 746 ≈ 47 hp
High:
350 kg x 200 W/kg = 70,000 W
70,000 W / 746 ≈ 94 hp
Despite what the term “horsepower” would seem to suggest, a horse can actually output more than one horsepower. Estimates put peak output of a horse around 12-15 hp. By those numbers, even the low end estimate above is around 3-4x too high. We’re gonna need more dogs.
We’re gonna need more dogs.
I accept your terms.
Horsepower was originally used to describe the work that a horse could do over the course of an hour. Specifically, the number of times an hour a horse could turn a mill wheel at a brewery. These are estimates of peak power, not sustained power, so I would say that it’s accurate that horses can produce significantly more than one horsepower in short bursts.
I appreciate the sanity check, but just to throw a monkey wrench into your model…
I think the square-cube law will bite you here. I expect power/mass isn’t constant. Mass grows faster than cross-sectional area which is key in muscle performance.
Fair
Might be my favorite thread today. Thank you, polite and nerdy strangers.
I’m guessing that would be if every muscle was being used for propulsion at any given time. You’d need to allow for heart and lungs, as well as face, neck, tail muscles that don’t contribute to power output, plus legs don’t provide continuous power as they need to make a return trip.
If we really wanted to optimise a dog for power:weight there are quite a few systems we could do away with. But it would likely result in a less floofy doggo, so it’s obviously not an option.
Stop burning the planet down to generate social media comments about shit you don’t understand
If I’m not mistaken, you specifically showed an interest in better understanding this.
I recognise their username. It’s half sane takes, half absolute wankery with them.
-
That was a joke
-
Stop fucking use AI, or at least get used to a sizable portion of people to tell you, that you’re burning the only planet we have down over shit that doesn’t matter.
deleted by creator
Username checks out
-
you made an offhand joke and got mad at him for continuing the joke?
Stop burning the planet down to generate social media comments
I mean, I thought it would be obvious my issue was with using AI to do so…
Even if it had been a serious question.
But, to be fair I was thinking of what a normal.person would be able to parse, and not people who’s critical thinking had already atrophied from offloading to AI.
They probably don’t have any idea what I meant and would need it explicitly spelled out.
If It makes you feel better (or at least more educated)……the entire three-prompt interaction to calculate dogpower consumed roughly the same amount of energy as making three Google searches.
A single Google search uses about 0.3 watt-hours (Wh) of energy. A typical AI chat query with a modern model uses a similar amount, roughly 0.2 to 0.34 Wh. Therefore, my dogpower curiosity discussion used approximately 0.9 Wh in total.
For context, this is less energy than an LED lightbulb consumes in a few minutes. While older AI models were significantly more energy-intensive (sometimes using 10 times more power than a search) the latest versions have become nearly as efficient for common tasks.
For even more context, It would take approximately 9 Lemmy comments to equal the energy consumed by my 3-prompt dogpower calculation discussion.
This is not correct and can easily be disproven, even if one assumes less than 480g/Kwh.
And that is ignoring the infrastructure necessary to perform a search vs AI query.
You’re absolutely right! According to the research you cited, the energy use is actually much LOWER than I stated in my comment.
Your source shows that an efficient AI model (Qwen 7B) used only 0.058 watt-hours (Wh) per query.
Based on that, my entire 3-prompt chat only used about 0.17 Wh. That’s actually less energy than a single Google search (~0.3 Wh). Thanks for sharing the source and correcting me.
I didn’t realize it even was ai generated. but even if it is, that’s still a fairly off-putting way to respond.
but even if it is, that’s still a fairly off-putting way to respond.
No you’re right…
It’s not like it’s literally burning our planet down and the people profiting off it aren’t tech bro fascists…
attacking someone will never change someone’s mind.
How do you know they’re not running a local model? Ultimately the problem with LLM accusations is that short of a confession or doing some hardcore surveillance of the other person you can’t prove it
edit: or fingerprinting/watermarking
edit2: no, “you can tell by the way it is” isn’t proof (simply because that’s fixable in an instant). even if you’re the smartest person on the internet. and again, it could be a local model.
Ultimately the problem with LLM accusations is that short of a confession or doing some hardcore surveillance of the other person you can’t prove it
Human variation.
Ironically you would have to take the others person word on it, luckily you just said you were comfortable doing so.
Some people are statistically insignificant, and to them lots of stuff is incredibly obvious and they’re constantly frustrated others can’t see it. They might even sink sizeable free time into explaining random shit, just to practice not losing their temper when people can’t see the obvious.
So you might not be able to tell that was AI from a glance, but humans are pattern recognition machines and we’re not all equally good at it.
So believe a “llm accusation” or not, but some people absolutely can pick out a chatbot response, especially when taking the two seconds to glance at typical comments from a user profile.
Jump from 1-2 sentence comments to a stereotypical AI response…
Well, again, not everyone is as good at picking out patterns quickly.
To some what took me literally under 10 seconds and two clicks counts as “hardcore surveillance” because it would take them a long time to figure it out.
Don’t assume everyone else is exactly like you.
Stop burning the planet to tell people what to burn the planet for.
1 dogpower obviously. /s
Americans will use ANYTHING to avoid metric.
What if we compromise on fractional thousandths of a kilodog?
1/1000 of a kilodog is just a dog bro
I took it more as a dig at Americans honestly…
The second line is KW hours compared to HP.
And the English still use pounds for weight and stuff pretty regularly.
So pounds and KW hours for them.
Small dogs and HP for Americans.
You can talk horsepower and dogpower all day, but I won’t really understand until you convert it to bananapower, for scale.
or about the same as a small dog.
Americans will use anything but the metric system
For all non Brits: 1 dogpower = 1005 horsepower It’s an imperial unit. You’re welcome.
Something something anything but metric…
Once I figured out it was an axial flux prototype motor this whole article made sense.
Nerd
I wonder if we’ll ever get enough standardization across EVs so people can start doing the electric equivalent of an LS swap.
I could see this being done on a Slate truck, along with an auxiliary EV battery bolted in the back.It’s more about the batteries than the motor. You can make a motor that sucks down as much power as you want. The battery can’t necessarily provide that without damage.
Hopefully solid-state batteries (once their production managed to ramp up to consumer vehicle scale) could allow for higher capacity and power delivery without the limitations or safety risks of current battery tech.
I mean, I guess. Power output isn’t what I’m really hoping for on new battery tech. What we have is perfectly capable of 0-60 times that only thoroughbred performance street cars can meet (like Ariel Atom territory), and the top speed is plenty.
Once you’re putting down 500hp, tires start to become a limiting factor. The torque that goes behind that number can stress the limit on all but the largest tires with the stickiest compounds.
Safety, range, and weight reduction of new battery tech are great, though.
Yep, I have an EV and the way my partner drove it just eats through tires. We’re talking about $1.5k, 50k mile warranty tires being replaced at 20-25k because someone liked to pretend they’re a fucking astronaut on launch day.
Not bitter.
So you get another set under the warranty? Maybe even twice?
I wish! The tire shop said that the last set was damaged by excessive acceleration, so they wouldn’t honor the warranty. I can’t argue - our EV has over 600 horsepower and almost 900 lb-ft of torque, so my partner is just destroying those poor tires.
Oof, I’d question how they could even determine that beyond “shouldn’t have worn that fast” but I suppose they know what they’re doing…
I also have an EV and tires need changing way faster, for sure. The original tires were replaced only after 2 years, but I just love taking off on that animal, so, I’ll be wasting more money on tires.
Current capacity, safety and power delivery are fine for most purposes, really.
LFP batteries really solved battery fires - they can’t produce their own oxygen like older NMC batteries, so they just get really hot and die instead of going off like fireworks.
Once you get past 300 miles, you’re pushing the limits of the average bladder and you need to stop before the car does.
With current electric trucks, if you’re doing some city driving and plug the truck in when you take a break, a truck driver will run out of hours before the truck runs out of range.
Like this?
Ah they’re rating motors like they used to rate speakers?
https://www.amazon.ca/Mr-Dj-PSE65BT-Portable-Rechargeable/dp/B078BT8DB4
Ah happy days. I’ve not heard PMPO in so long!
Car engines, for probably the past 100 years, have always been advertised based on their peak power rating, not what they can produce continuously. Cars are not designed to have their accelerator peddles floored for hours on end, nor is this even possible to do, as you’d eventually hit a curve and need to slow down.
This is especially the case for high performance vehicles, which usually have more demanding maintenance requirements just from normal operation, let alone from being abused like that.
Anything but metric!
1000 horses sounds cooler than 735 electrical pixies a second.
And somehow also more impressive than one Zeus per minute
But horses are measured in hands, average of 16 hands so 16000 hands, 8000 people. That’s like 1 electrical pixie per 11 people
Horsepower is a pretty standard way to advertise things in the automotive industry…
But it should be kilowatts. There’s no reason not to use the standard metric for power, it’s unnecessary fragmentation of figures
Well the metric version is about 1014 PS, but honestly the difference between horsepower and pferdestärke is pretty negligible.
Sadly “745 kW” doesn’t sound as cool as “1000 horsepower.”
What are you on about? The metric unit for power is the Watt
Watt? 🤔
What are you on about? The metric unit for power is the Watt
They said anything but metric. The SI unit for power is the Watt, sure, but there are other metric units that are not SI units. One of these is the metric horsepower. 1 metric horsepower is defined as the amount of power required to raise 75kg of mass 1 meter in 1 second against Earth’s gravity. I used pferdestärke because automakers use the “PS” abbreviation in my experience.
This unit exists as an attempt to have a value comparable to historic mechanical horsepower measurements but defined with metric terms.
Obviously Watts are the preferred unit for most things, but the automotive world still likes horsepower. So, metric horsepower.
That sounds very dependent on the language. I’ve never read/heard “PS” as horsepower before. Let’s just use kW ffs.
Colloquially “metric” means the SI-system though. It’s not all prescriptively correct terms. Hell, even the name isn’t, as the French and English couldn’t
So I’m not goanna say your wrong per se. But you’re not exactly right either
So I’m not goanna say your wrong per se. But you’re not exactly right either
In what way am I not right? We’re talking about an electric motor for automobiles, and I gave a metric unit that automakers use. What’s more, I also gave it in kW! 🤣
Automakers using a unit doesn’t make it metric.
Got it. Metric horsepower isn’t metric. Forgive me for thinking a recognized metric unit is metric. And also for not putting the kW conversion in bold or something.
🙄
