Would you fly on an electric plane? And what technology is needed to make this unholy powertrain work? The challenges will lead to extraordinary designs...
This is the electric aviation thread!
In this thread we'll cover:
-Different electric & hybrid aircraft power systems.
-The challenge of full electric: Closing the energy gulf.
-Enabling tech: Batteries, motors, aerodynamics.
-Will it work?
Expect incredible concepts & links to specialist aerodynamics threads!
Cycle 1: Turbo-electric power.
A gas turbine engine with generator, DC buses & convertor drives electric motors, no battery storage: This could eat 10% efficiency, but buys the ability for integrated airframe concepts such as boundary layer ingestion & distributed propulsion.
Hybrid-electric.
Like a car engine, an aircraft engine is most efficient at it's design cruise condition. By using rechargeable batteries & electric motors, hybrid cycles try to smooth out engine demand so it spends more time at it's most efficient point.
Cycle 2: Series hybrid.
A turbo electric layout plus a battery bank, the propulsor is electrically driven. Heavier even than the turbo electric cycle, it does however allow the engine to stay at optimal running condition, a net benefit for short haul & regional aircraft.
Cycle 3: Parallel hybrid.
A transmission box allows either engine or electric motor to power the prop. More complex but lighter than series hybrid with fewer conversion losses, but leads to the engine running off-design more often. Considered less efficient than series hybrid.
The trouble with hybrids is that, just as a hybrid car is best at town & city driving, a hybrid plane is best at short haul & general aviation: Long haul aircraft spend too long at their design condition for hybrid power systems to be of much use.
What about pure electric?
Cycle 4: Battery electric.
Conceptually the simplest setup, it's simultaneously the most "green", as a zero emissions aircraft, and the most difficult, which we'll get into.
Pictured: The RR 'Spirit Of Innovation' demonstrator. At 345mph, the fastest electric plane.
If we do it, it won't be for convenience: The specific energy of kerosene is 48 times higher than lithium ion batteries: An unbridgeable gulf?
Electric motors are 90%+ efficient while the thermodynamic efficiency of gas turbines are ~55%, making the ratio 'only' 1:29
Enablers 1: Batteries.
Li-ion batteries, the gold standard, max at ~250Wh/kg.
Li-sulphur, on the Airbus Zephyr have shown 500Wh/kg but so far only 1350 cycles.
Solid state: Fast-charging and 500-1000Wh/kg. Under development.
Li-Air: Potentially 1700Wh/kg, but a long way off.
Enablers 2: Motors.
Conventional motors have a specific power of 1-5kW/kg, less than gas turbines.
-In 2021 H3X & Wright Electric tested 250kW & 2MW motors with 13 & 10kW/kg.
The EU sponsored ASuMED project is developing high temperature superconductor motors for 20kW/kg.
Batteries of 800Wh/kg are probably a minimum for electric aviation: If we assume that 1000 is achievable then that brings the usable specific energy ratio with kerosene down to 1:7.
This means that aerodynamics must do some heavy lifting to get it down to low single figures...
Enablers 3: Distributed propulsion.
Electric powertrains allow this: Extremely high bypass low pressure ratio propulsors with blown wing effects maximizing efficiency.
The hybrid electric EcoPulse aircraft shown is halfway through flight testing proving this concept.
A thread on distributed propulsion is linked below, featuring the ONERA Dragon concept: A medium range airliner showing a 7%-12% efficiency benefit from distributed propulsion alone. Hybrid power storage could increase this further.
This wake energy management technique reduces flow field energy loss and can improve the efficiency of propulsors by embedding them in the aircraft boundary layer. A structurally robust well-sited prop is needed.
Definitely the biggest ask of airframers & airports, and not strictly necessary, it remains a potentially optimal platform from an efficiency standpoint, and works well with distributed propulsion & BLI.
The NASA N3-X concept uses all three aero enablers in a long range turbo-electric flying wing with cryocoolers enabling superconducting motors and higher turbine inlet temperature.
60% more fuel efficient than current state of the art, it's an idealised design but instructive.
Another rich opportunity for hybrid power is helicopter aviation, where it would be worth 10% in efficiency all on it's own without other improvements. Airbus recently tested this as part of an emergency back up power system for the FlightLab helicopter.
Novel hybrid electric/ turbo-electric power architectures, with a gas turbine engine at the core, have huge potential from short to long range, and we should move that way, but the aerospace industry might not leap without a push.
What about pure electric aircraft..?
Frankly, pure electric is a lost cause everywhere except short range and city transport niches: The specific energy gulf is just too large.
But it's still important: Electric aviation's huge energy challenge forces it to deal with unconventional design, and this is it's value.
The city eVTOL niche is tiny, almost a joke, but it's the only electric aviation sector plausible right now, making it a technology incubator.
Inconsistent regulation could kill it dead, and it's important we don't do that: Technology grows from seeds, which we should water.
So let's hear it for the challenge of electric aviation, because it might, just maybe, be a catalyst that will move us beyond the tube, wing & twin configuration.
So the future might actually look like the future.
Papers used are shown, I hope you enjoyed this!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In 2022, short on electrical grid inertia and long on renewable power, Ireland installed the world's largest flywheel, 130 spinning tons.
Why did we do something so preposterous?
And are there other, better storage technologies? Let's find out.
It's the grid storage thread!
In this thread we'll cover all the major storage techniques and what they're good for. Be warned: There is NO perfect method.
Before we get started, the difference between power & energy:
Power (MW): How much oomph/ what can you power with this.
Energy (MWh): Power x time.
The classical use case is load shifting: Storing electricity in low demand periods and supplying it back in high demand periods: Hours, days or weeks later. These require high energy capacity, crucial for renewable-dominated grids.
What do cloud formations around islands, the singing of wires in wind, suspension bridges and the legs of St. Christopher have in common?
It's the Von Karman vortex street, and it subtlety shapes the world around us.
Let's take a walk down the street...
We've all noticed it, the howling of wires in a gale. We may also have noticed eddies in streams or pondered why some chimneys have spiral fluting.
If we had the viewpoint of an angel we'd note the shedding of cloud spirals behind islands.
It is all interconnected.
When a bluff body is in a steady flow of the right speed an oscillating vortex pattern will form behind it: Flow moving around each side of the body will, unable to withstand the adverse pressure gradient, detach into vortices that curl around the back of the body.
Yesterday the 220 knot Airbus RACER took to the skies for the first time: A high-tech compound helicopter.
But what are compound helicopters, why did work on them stop for three decades, and will the Racer bring them back?
A thread.
A conventional helicopter is great at hover & low speed manoeuvre but has an implicit speed limit: As the helicopter accelerates the advancing blade's airspeed gets higher until it approaches the speed of sound and the retreating blade's airspeed gets lower until it stalls.
This phenomenon also affects blade angle of attack over the rotor, requiring dynamic intervention to counteract pitch & roll. This all increases with rotor loading, so to go faster we need to unload the rotor.
A liquid fuelled rocket compresses and mixes fuel and an oxidiser (e.g liquid oxygen, hydrogen peroxide or nitrogen tetroxide), burns it in a combustion chamber and then expands & accelerates the hot gas through a convergent-divergent nozzle. The faster the exhaust the better.
Not literally, but let's find out what makes them tick, what challenges remain, and why the unreal prospect of cooling reactor cores with hot lead could be a Very Good Idea.
A thread.
Russia pioneered the use of lead cooled reactors in the 70s & 80s, with the November & Alfa class submarine reactors making use of lead-bismuth eutectic (LBE ) coolant. The high thermal conductivity and low pressure allowed for a smaller, lighter, high power density reactor.
To understand this, and other advantages, we need to understand lead.
1) Lead is heavy: 11 times more dense than water or sodium, another liquid metal coolant. 2) High boiling point: 1749C & 1670C for lead & LBE respectively: High temperatures with no need for pressurisation.