Interesting product. However the representative is too much of a sales person. An interview with an engineer talking about technical specifications would be preferred.
This video of "Just have a think" gives a more detailed view of this solution. It came out the day before this video :) ua-cam.com/video/W3hVLG5iDec/v-deo.html
Talk is cheap, show us some real comparison data on efficiency, let's say from 10% to 90% on the I-Phace. Include the energy consumption on the grid side, before the charger and it's electronics. This should be a test you can do in Oslo Bjørn?
In the end, charging wirelessly will be more expensive, because Somebody has to pay for the Energy that is beeing used. On the other hand people pay for convenience.
I think posting the other video first was a genius move. It started the efficiency questioning without having a sales guy telling ferrytales before. Really like that people are questioning this.
He stated he is non technical (did not know the operation frequency) but then claims he's a chartered engineer. Perhaps he is, but not electrical that's for sure.
Don't overstate the charging times for cable connected chargers. An 80% charge can be accomplished in 15 to 20 minutes. Even 2 charges per day is only 40 minutes, not 3 hours. Demand smoothing is also done with cable charging operating in off-peak periods after midnight, not all at 6 pm. Other aspects mentioned are positive points. Overstating the negatives compromises your credibility.
@@karthik11512 Thanks for the clarification. I didn't hear the word London directly linked to taxi, probably because a 3 hour charge time was unimaginable.
Keep in mind that for London taxis conventional DC quick chargers are also more constrained as far as where they can be installed than Momentum Dynamics' system because of the amount of space they take up above ground, and how close the power electronics feeding the chargers needs to be. So that means likely that there can't be as many of them, and they're less likely to be conveniently placed. That reduced availability means there's more time added to keeping the car charged due to increased time to get to and from the charger, plus queuing for it if it's busy. Traffic in London moves very slowly for much of the working day in a lot of London's busy taxi service area, so a charger doesn't have to be much further away to add significant delay.
@@bikingvikingstudios Exactly, but 7.5kW dissipation @ 75kW - the rated power. 90% of 75kW. That's a lot of power loss, like running an electric shower!
I find this somewhat hard to believe considering the much larger distances that similar amounts of power routinely travels in much of the existing grid. I live in a condo and as far as I know there's only single-phase 230V AC into my apartment and the 26 other apartments in the building, all coming from a single 400V 3-phase intake to the building, fed by a transformer station some ~70 meters away. Now I don't know how the rectifier works, but it certainly is no diode-based thing and I'm guessing it is some power MOSFET sort of thing, which makes me think the DC voltage it feeds to the car can easily be whatever you want quite independently of the AC voltage used for the inductive power transfer. Using a high voltage on the AC side means pretty moderate current would suffice, and hence you wouldn't need so much copper either..? I'm not really sure, but generally a lot of old electrical systems are just hopelessly inefficient and quite stupid designs in our time and age. Boats are only now starting to escape from 6V systems that require massive (and extra expensive, because of the corrosion-resistance they need to have to survive in a sea water environment) components. That probably stems from the batteries once used in boats but it lingered for decades after the reason to have this voltage no longer applied. IDK, but it seems a bit unbelievable that sending 50 kW of power down 30 m of cabling without expensive cables or huge losses should really be beyond technically possible.
@@dojohansen123 Exactly. Nobody's saying they're sending the 52 kW down the 30 m cable at 85 kHz. They could transmit it at 2 kVAC 50 Hz for all we know, and the hardware to convert back to lower voltage AC 85 kHz could be under the road right next to the plate. They've got an ex-NASA lead tech who worked on power systems for the International Space Station where high power and efficiency are vital to maintaining life support systems. It's not a huge leap to believe they can figure out how to carry more than 50 kW over 30 metres underground with minimal losses!
Benefit is mostly less wear and tear on cable connectors and lower maintenance cost on infrastructure. Everyone knows that some people are unable to handle hardware and will destroy everything they touch.
1) After 30 minutes, I still do not know what the claimed efficiency is. So to charge batteries at 50KWh, how much power the charger will consume to produce that 50KWh? The previous video claims 99.9%! 2) @2:05 claiming the air gap is not the source of loss, so 6ft air gap will still transfer the same power with 6" air gap? If that the case, this company should make the phone and electronics device charger too, it will sell like hot cake! As you experience with Qi charger, you have to have the phone right on the pad where it is marked on the charger. 3) How do they actually handle the heat since the road which can get really hot in the summer? I like wireless charging concept.
@@Lueeee While there are moving parts there's a difference between the kind of moving parts in a pantograph and the kind in a Momentum Dynamics system. Both require cooling, which does require a pump, though depending on the pump could involve under ten moving parts if you use fluid bearings, but that's pretty much it, and it's not exposed to the elements. The rest of it is designed not to move. A pantograph not only has the arm/frame that moves, and the conductor, but also the cooling loop itself is flexing along with the arm every time it goes to make or break contact. And most of those are in the open. The amount of maintenance involved is not really comparable.
The air gap is not a power sink, since it's only some air which can't heat up. So there isn't any loss because of the air gap itself. The air gap affects the coil coupling however and the resonant frequency between the two. With an air gap too distant you can just not transfer that much power, but it's not directly related to the efficiency of the transfer. As we have seen in the I-Pace video yesterday, they have optimized the coils for even larger air gap than the ground clearance of the I-Pace. So when liftig the airride they got even more power transferred. It's all about coil and core geometry with the right frequency.
1:55 "more efficient grid to vehicle than any cable-based charger." I'm calling Bullshit on this. Show us the actual measurements.Your last vid showed an air-conditioning unit to cool the drive electronics - if it needs that much cooling there's no way it's more efficient than a cable based system.
I think that they're hiring that under the improvements that may be possible by reducing battery size. Similar for claiming the need for two buses to cover a days use; doesn't happen in Shenzhen. Marketing speak.
For sure there is MORE conversion involved here than in cable DC chargers: the grid delivers 50Hz AC, that needs to be rectified an then converted to AC 85kHz. That's a different AC then the grid delivers. That just adds to the difficulty of proving the efficiency claim. But bring forward some numbers and we'll rediscuss! Also, I tend to agree to the many comments about marketing BS... there are lots of valid arguments abused to support the wireless case. But, again, for a fair evaluation numbers are required.
So an element of rectification is actually in the car? Is that being included in the referred-to high efficiency? Or is the high efficiency purely in getting the energy across the air gap?
@@reeshar1234 yes, necessarily. You need to feed the battery with a constant current that lies within the limits of what the battery can accept, at the current state of charge/temperature. If the charger could deliver more than what the battery can take, it needs to limit the current. Otherwise it can supply to the maximum of its operating specs of voltage and current. For example, many 50kW chargers are limited to 125A. If the battery voltage is too low, these "50kW" chargers don't even reach the max power of 50kW because the current hits the charger's limit. On the opposite end a huge 350kW charger will, for most of the charging, limit the current to what the battery can take, much below the charger's max current rating. Current is fixed, voltage follows whatever the battery's momentary voltage is at that SoC.
I think the ratio of adjectives to numbers in this guy's pitch gives some reason to be a bit skeptical. But that said, he is absolutely right about the big picture. Wireless charging is not inherently inefficient (wireless transfer of power of course happens multiple times upstream, in transformers, anyway), it greatly simplifies the "autonomous car goes off to charge" problem, it definitely can enable taxis, buses, and city delivery vans to get away with using smaller battery packs, it has the potential to shift and spread the car-charging related demand for electricity in time, and it certainly is a much more elegant solution that can be completely invisible and eliminate the minor hassle of plugging in and unplugging again. I am not so sure it will be cost-effective to equip all or most cars with a receiver with sufficient capacity to ever replace cables for fast-charging, but for parking spaces, especially at home where cars usually stay overnight, high speed would be mostly pointless anyway, so I don't consider this much of a problem. Personally, I'd love to have wireless charging at home, provided it isn't extremely fuzzy about where I park - so that charging becomes something you simply need not think of except for the very long trips. The sheer convenience would be awesome, and I would maintain a SoC more optimal for long term battery health than I do today, where staying in the 50-60% window is perfectly possible, but only if I plug in every time I've used the car.
Looks promising, but I would prefer our honest Bjorn, as their marketing department just providing the numbers.... [18:33] Keep in mind, this marketing guy is talking about a bus service with 100% uptime, not his chargers.
As he stated more than once he is a trained chartered engineer which means he has had to train at a university or equivalent. He is acting as a salesman naturally but not an ignorant salesman which is what we usually get!
@@johnodell5310 He didn’t know the switching frequency and said he was non technical too, which is perplexing. Perhaps he’s a chartered civil engineer? Certainly not electrical.
For your phone there are magnetic charging cables. An appropriate tiny magnetic connection adaptor (eg usb C) is inserted into the phone and left there. The cable then can make a magnetic connection to the phone eliminating the stress and wear on the phone's usb connection. All the cables that I've seen also have an LED at the charging end so the connection can easily be made in the dark by touching the lighted magnetic end to the phone connector. The only disadvantage is that it's only for charging, not for data which is not usually a problem with data by WiFi or Bluetooth, otherwise the magnetic connector can be removed if necessary for a data cable connection. I've had to replace a phone's connector due to wear at a substantial cost and this eliminates the problem. The magnetic cables all come with several of each type of usb connector and are available everywhere.
A major reason from a societal point of view for transition to EVs is energy efficiency. The little I remember from my physics class tell me that wireless charging must be less efficient than wired charging by a considerable amount... there will be heat loss.
Heating up is the opposite of efficiency. If it's highly efficient, I would not expect a lot of heat losses / heat build up. But I would still prefer to hear the real numbers on efficiency, rather than statements like "we're better than anything else".
Getting nerdy: Control signal is most likely a type of Frequency Modulation, taken from wireless communication tech. Handshake is most likely authentication against an private cert on car. Not dissimilar to auth IMEI/base station ->network gateway. Most likely, a new simpler, time-restricted symmetrical key/session/Auth token is used during charging and can follow the car during driving + charging. Cutting down auth-time to minimal, but leaving a log of charge provided (micro charges)
And what is the installation cost to fit these in the ground with cable trenches etc, it won’t be cheap and also pantographs have very, very few movimg and servicable parts, it’s mainly the conductor bars that can be worn. Cable chargers that are down are usually due to the charging unit itself, not the fact that it is a cable charger and many chargers have extremely consistent up-time
My electric toothbrush is charging extremely slowly, about 18 hours. The beard trimmer is charged with cord in a couple of hours. However, they cannot be compared with magnetic resonance, which is way more effective. Of course, the converter requires cooling, just as with all equipment for charging, regardless of technology. Nevertheless, I am a little concerned about the overall efficiency. Is the loss really less with two coils than with a directly connected cable? The convenience and reliability are obvious, but how does it work in rural areas?
It would be pretty smart in cities around taxi-parking, traffic light intersections and possibly even on highways prone to still standing traffic during rush hour.
I want to see info man. What if the car is not on center with the charger. How will this handle road traffic. Ok you have a 4 year uptime on bus charges but at what cost. What about places where it gets below freezing. Also air gap is a problem it's why we need 10Kw radio towers.
You can watch how these pads work in reality on Two Bit Davinci channel. But claims about efficiency seems to be to good to be true. Even when there are some losses in DC sent through cable that shouldn't be more than missaligment of charging and reciving pads.
Most likely rollout according to economy, location and # of pax. Urban areas have a larger problem with allocating space for stuff, and value it accordingly. Few rural ppl will pay for the additional up front cost of induction charging when cable charging works
I miss clear answers (including weight, for example) from Momentum Dynamics! 1. Yes, please to third-party testing, including with a Tesla. 2. How much is the gross loss in wireless charging compared to cable charging in different EVs? at 11 kW / 50 kW / +120 kW. 3. Prices of wireless systems at 11 kW / 50 kW / +120 kW. 4.How many wireless modules does Momentum Dynamics produce today/year? When does Momentum Dynamics expect to mass-produce wireless chargers? And how much cheaper will the wireless modules be? 5. Is the primary target group taxis and buses? 6. Is the AC generated after the wireless charger in the car of a quality that does not strain/damage the AC/DC converter in the car? 7. What is the loss (in %) in the module I mentioned in point 6 ? 8. Can this wireless system function as V2G (Vehicle-to-Grid)? What is the energy loss in % (from the grid to the car to the grid)?
Not cheap which is why the current focus on commercial fleets and public transportation. It only makes sense for private owner usage when the technology is standardized something like CSS Plug-and-Charge. In addition, the price for a vehicle charging pad and installation needs to come down significantly. Once that happens, OEM's can add charging pads as an option or at least make it easy to install one after vehicle purchase.
Sounds great to me, but we have a lot of people around here that are afraid of even "smart" meters. They are going to freak out about high power, high frequency inductive car charging...
Very much a sales person. No need to be a critic for London Taxis and cable solutions. This is a heavy weight solution that should focused on Buses and HGVs. IF IT WORKS then once you have made it work with bus fleets it will then naturally spread to other use cases.
Need to introduce a standard place to put a pad on a vehicle... long vehicles could have multiple reciever pads? ...then at traffic intersections also have the transmission pads at the same distances - with appropriate road markings.
A high efficiency is possible if the system uses resonant switching. But the problem with the current fixed frequency standards of 85 khz for wireless charging is so stupid and makes the thing inefficient. Long story short, a fixed frequency wireless charger is only efficient at one or a few operating points and not the entire charging curve. I dont know who came up with the standards but a variable frequency will not only be efficient over the entire range but also cheaper since there is no need to have a matching network to achieve fixed frequency operation.
Thought I'd better share it quick before it disappeared, like the NIO battery swap interview the other day, was probably about ip or editing issues, I suspect
No way!!! Right in the first words a lie from the "Momentum Dynamics" / John Holland? Sorry but it will NEVER be better efficiency than a simple cable. This is just impossible. But thanks to Björn to digg deeper and try to ask the right questions again and again. (I will not say it's impossible or bad, just it's not the best and NOT efficienc)
First question: how about use of onboard charger of EV? Just add wireless pad underneath, and connect to onboard charger. I know it will be less powerfull than 50kW, but definetly will be cheaper. Second: what about using this super efficient rectifiers istead of onboard charger? This can be super upgrade option for many cars, in this example IPace will be able charging with Type2 AC up to 43 kW
SO when charging at 75kW: 90% Efficient = a loss of 7.5kW 95% Efficient = a loss of 3.75kW That's a lot of losses. One suspects they are using some very creative and theoretical accounting in their numbers. Plus the losses will be much higher over a 30m cable.
The 30m cable is not something critical, as that part can be "super thick" cable, even considering skin effect at 85kHz, that is "easy". What I wonder about in the coil on the road and under the car, how thick cable is there? I still want to see the real number from them, not the "very efficiency" talk. The 90% or more efficiency claim, we need to know measured from where to where. 90% is a pretty good number all in all. A very optimized DC-DC converter under 1kW that hits 95% is something to talk about.
Finally someone cares about the battery life. Tesla: Give us a slow charge option with Superchargers, if the location is empty. Sometimes I have time(SC directly beside a good restaurant) and could slow charge.
Remember that in an electrical induction motor, electrical cables are wound around the iron in the motor. This transfers energy across an air gap to an aluminum / iron rotor. First you want to magnetize the iron in the rotor. Then this iron will induce current in the aluminum bars which will amplify the magnetic field in the rotor. The only difference is that air gap between the car and the basement is greater. But this has to do with the type of iron you magnetize. Remember there are iron that can transfer 1000 of hertz and there are iron that can transfer 1-10 hertz. It's all about iron type. The thing here is to make the iron type that is best for transferring energy over distance. We talk about 20-30 centimeters. Example is here.... ua-cam.com/video/xEUnBNL8Dyk/v-deo.html&ab_channel=CPESVT
"Autonomous cars must charge automatically" Really? can't they be plugged in during their cleaning stops? In bad weather that could be after every ride or so. Honestly this is innovation without a market.
We now have around 11mio. EVs in the world that cannot use this tech. So 11mio. EVs that are not allowed to use the parking space that induction spots take up. Not speaking of ICE vehicles.
EV adoption is accelerating every year. Exponential not linear. The only limiting factor is batteries. The number of electric vehicles and types of vehicles and trucks is growing. Many people are holding off buying a new car or scooter until the electric vehicle they want becomes available. Electric vehicles are just better. No noise, no emissions, less fuel costs, less maintenance costs and amazing technology. Gasoline and diesel are OLD polluting technology. So last century. Electric cars, electric trucks, electric buses, electric trash haulers, electric snow blowers, electric lawn mowers, electric weed whackers, electric hedge trimmers, electric snow mobiles, electric water craft, electric garden tools, electric mechanic tools, electric motor cycles, electric bicycles, electric scooters, electric farm tractors, electric construction equipment, electric delivery vehicles, ...... everything is going electric. No worries about starting after sitting for a few months. Gas always needs repairs. If you care about the future for your children care about climate change
So if I trip and fall onto one of their charging spots it will destroy my pacemaker, then turn off, then hopefully my phone still works so I can dial 911 with the last 15 seconds of my life. Maybe instead it should always be in an off state until it communicates with a vehicle then it turns on. That way I only die if I am already under the car. And if I’m already under the car I have more things to worry about than their charging pad.
I think that is how it works - low power radio loop to communicate with vehicle and then powers up once it has been activated by a valid account - just the same as current chargers communicate with the car before opening the power.
20:40. This is very disingenuous. Every EV owner I know uses time of use billing. Our power company gives a discount for charging when energy is plentiful and cheap. If anything, this system will be worse for the grid as vehicles will be charging more during peak times. That being said, I do think this product has its merits in the right use case. Edit: fixed spelling mistakes
True, but bear in mind many of the current EV owners are still considered early adopters. It remains to be seen if the general public will give two figs about delaying charging until overnight, or even waiting a couple of days until the grid carbon emissions are going to be lower.
I agree this statement was a bit of a negative on what was a fairly positive discussion up until that point. Off-peak time charging is a simple solution that requires no major changes or capital investment. "EVs are bad for the grid" is a myth that anti-EV types use, the fact he's willing to jump on that bandwagon to market his product is a bit questionable.
I imagine a future when you have a charger like this in your garage and you never have to worry about plugging your car in, that would be grat. I see a big opportunity on this application, too.
Yes! Finally a working solution. But do they have any intention of implementing this into highways to charge vehicles on the go, as well? I mean, they should alternate some smaller versions of these pads at a regular distance and supply just enough power to sustain the higher highway consumption. It would be very useful, especially for hauling trucks Anyways, seems like a good start
You're not an engineer, are you? Let's do a very rough calculation. Let's assume that the transmitter and receiver are the same size and have a length of 1m. At 108 km/h (30 m/s) the car will travel that 1 m in 1/30th of a second. But both the transmitter and receiver will overlap 80% of their length for only 40% of that time, which is only 0.013 seconds. At 50 kW, this time would be enough to get 0.18 Wh. If we assume a consumption of 180Wh/km, then we need to have 1000 of these chargers per kilometer, which basically means that the entire road must be made of induction chargers. Now imagine how much that would cost.
Regarding the efficiency claim, plugin charging can be made more efficient if cost is not a concern. Just use very expensive compoenets to lower losses. Wireless charging has more components and in theory can never beat plugin efficiency. In the real world, cost is a primary driver and that is why plugin charging don't push for 95%. Dynamic wireless charging has too much safety issues and is too far from now..
Although wireless charging is for sure convenient, it can't be more efficient than cable charging - that's physics. Everything is efficient, it can be 0.1% efficient or 99% efficient - and I dispute claims of 99% efficiency from previous video. It might very well be that with the high frequency range they are using for charging is unaffected by water, snow ice and most of the dirt. Previously they stated that the bigger the gap the better the efficiency - this is a BS statement. All the marketing mumbo, jumbo coming from the mouth of "I am not the engineer" guy is the first red flag, claims they are saying are unrealistic with the tech we have. This is reminiscent of the solar roadways BS, and I fear there is some clever, forward looking politician, that is just eager to commission this BS solution for wider use, paid with taxpayers money. If something looks too be good to be true it probably is = 100% efficient statement
The permissions required for the installations were probably prohibitive, I think Tesla's coast to coast North American charging network might still not be complete if they had chosen to use induction chargers. It certainly looks good for a robo-taxi fleet though.
The catch is smaller batteries to make room for the coil and electronics. There are also the issues of interference from metal objects that was glanced over. This is highly speculative technology. Tesla made the right choice not to pursue it.
This is BS. Even if this wasn't a really wasteful solution to charging vehicles, you can only really fill the roads with these things in densely populated areas, where range is not a problem at all to begin with. Can someone please give me one use case for this product that justifies the insane cost of implementing this system, instead of just plugging in at superchargers and not wasting electricity running coolers to get a slower charging speed?
Use case? You got me there. I'm still trying to work out what the problem is they are trying to solve! Surely AV Taxis will need cleaning every few trips, they can be plugged in then.
I'm thinking police, EMS, etc. If electrification of these vehicles is to happen, a solution will be needed where the operator can drive away without taking the time to disconnect a cable. Maybe I'm thinking too pie in the sky, but having EVs for these applications would be massively more efficient than having engines idling all day. One honest benefit I can see with a system such as this is eliminating connector wear for vehicles that would need to always be charging.
@@mvansumeren4313 I can’t think of any use case at all batteries are getting so cheap especially LFP sales vehicles just will not require charging very often. Besides which emergency vehicles Bei had to go quite long distances for serious incidents, saysay on the motorway all required to be standby for a considerable amount of time, so will in a case require large batteries.
Lotsa negative comments about wireless charging. Agreed, the guy MD sent to talk to Bjorn wasn't the best representative; but I think wireless could play a big role in EV infrastructure within the city. It doesn't need to be perfect from an efficiency standpoint, just "good enough". If MD can scale the system shown in Bjorn's other video, including the rapid user account handshakes, they might have a product that has reached that point. Don't underestimate the value of convenience. Wouldn't it be odd if after all we have seen of charging infrastructure development in Bjorn's videos, that the EV future ended up being ubiquitous wireless charging pads to support city travel; and battery swapping stations for road trips? Of course, that would require everyone involved to agree to implement a sheeeeit-load of standards in their products, so who knows if it can happen. The only sure thing is that Norway will reach EV Nirvana first.
I expect this system to be 10-20 % less efficient than cable-based charging. This means that several thousand watts are burned for the convenience not to plug in a cable. Also it would cost several euros extra per battery charge. In addition the needed hardware is expensive. The inefficiency may even lead governments to regulate this technology.
1:55 .."more efficient grid to vehicle than any cable based charger" Bullshit! Maybe if you don't account for the AC-DC converter inside the vehicle but this would be so misleading that it's basically a lie.
Reminds me abit of the early TV pilots with a cable. Ofcourse anyone understands this is the future if charging and will make all the difference where you have a charger at your home in your own garage. No station anymore just drive home.
OMG Panic!! only 89 % efficient !! Spending 400% to 500% of same energy to move a gas car - OKAY, that's fine, it's old and gold: just takes 5 mins to "recharge"
Yeah, and many others, too. I think the problem is an absence of all-around specialists. Besides of being higly qualified in electro-chemistry, material science, power electronics, one would have to be an exceptional RF systems engineer, which is a vast field on it's own. And it's not how electrical engineers are trained nowadays, probably.
Sounds like the future, now we just need industry standard so any brand can use them. Less battery, less consumption, longer range, more agile car etc.
@@ovi9610 please read the other comments here. its explained enough already. even a cursury glance at RF and basic electronics will make you understand the guy is selling hot air.
@@SupremeRuleroftheWorld ok, maybe he's a sale person. Promising but too early to be all true ? More deep testing please. 4 years charging wireless buses without a fail, ...maybe is fake or the best invention for EV charging.
17:20 It’s good for the city, no cables, a clean pedestrian zone, etc. And what about radiation? Everyone skips that problem. 50KW of wireless power transmission is fucking dangerous, it's a strong magnetic field. It is dangerous to sit in a car or walk past a car while the car is charging. Technology ahead of health = success, nope.
What is so dangerous about it? We use electromagnetic fields for all manner of things. Things only get potentially dangerous to biological life when you get into the microwave range (~900-2500 MHz (millions of cycles per second)) as it can cause diathermic heating. EM radiation within the ~85 KHz (thousands of cycles per second) used for this is several orders of magnitude short of being able to be dangerous to anything other than a metallic object that gets between the transmitter and receiver. Also, if you're getting confused with ionizing radiation, that stuff doesn't start until well after the hundreds of THz (trillions of cycles per second) range. Just remember, all radiation isn't made equal. *Ionizing* radiation is the nasty stuff that makes bad things happen to us meat bags. 😁
@@mvansumeren4313 @12:12 It will stop if it detects any metal because the metal will get hot, so when car is on top would it then do nothing so how does it know if the car can be charged or not since the hand shake is also done via the magnetic filed power that is used for charging?
Also one would need to generate quite a field to transfer this amount of energy. Especially if it's from the ground and up. Probably good if your not planning to make babies any time soon.
I hate people like this. They not only say their vision of the future is better but the also say no one’s else’s vision of the future will work. His statement that having cars driving around with 700Kg of batteries can not work. My response to that is shut the hell up. Yes it can. And quit bashing the other electric car designs. Yours sounds great. But I want a car that can drive 500 miles on a dirt road. That car is now possible in electric versions. You spreading lies that it can’t work doesn’t actually boost your technology it boosts the fossil full industry. So stop spreading those lies.
3 роки тому+1
Pure bullshit!! Persuing wireless charging for anything is irresponsible in every single way. Even more so for high power transfers. The benefits of saving 20 sec to attach a cable is to small to defend the massive use of resources both from a economical and environmental standpoint. Massive amounts of copper and energy in the form of powerlosses and manufacturing etc completely wasted in order to save seconds of inconvenience. If you Björn have any interest in representing a environmentally friendly or at least intelligent consumer, you would see through this BS!
3 роки тому
@@ulf5738 The cost and resources needed for the hardware to enable wireless charging will always be wasteful compared to the benefit. Specially for buses and taxis that do a lot of kms/energy and thereby the powerlosses will be very costly.
Charge cars at 6.00PM? Who does that? Every EV driver I know (including my wife and I) charges overnight. Is he saying that his wireless charger does not operate after 6pm? Mega BS here.
Interesting product. However the representative is too much of a sales person. An interview with an engineer talking about technical specifications would be preferred.
This video of "Just have a think" gives a more detailed view of this solution. It came out the day before this video :) ua-cam.com/video/W3hVLG5iDec/v-deo.html
@@geraldh.8047 it sounds scammy because it is. at least his claims are.
@@geraldh.8047 I think the air conditioner in the cabin says it all. I bet they don't include the a/c unit in their efficiency numbers either!
yeah and already in previous video, he talked nonsense...
@@xeon2k8 It's irrelevant with modern LFP batteries that have a design life of over a million miles.
Talk is cheap, show us some real comparison data on efficiency, let's say from 10% to 90% on the I-Phace. Include the energy consumption on the grid side, before the charger and it's electronics. This should be a test you can do in Oslo Bjørn?
In the end, charging wirelessly will be more expensive, because Somebody has to pay for the Energy that is beeing used. On the other hand people pay for convenience.
I think posting the other video first was a genius move. It started the efficiency questioning without having a sales guy telling ferrytales before. Really like that people are questioning this.
"ex-Nasa" - bullshit alarm triggered
Flat earther would instantly call BS because of Nasa :D
@@DaRockCRX And rightly so.
prehaps he got fired by nasa for being a hack? that part was left out...
He stated he is non technical (did not know the operation frequency) but then claims he's a chartered engineer. Perhaps he is, but not electrical that's for sure.
Don't overstate the charging times for cable connected chargers. An 80% charge can be accomplished in 15 to 20 minutes. Even 2 charges per day is only 40 minutes, not 3 hours. Demand smoothing is also done with cable charging operating in off-peak periods after midnight, not all at 6 pm. Other aspects mentioned are positive points. Overstating the negatives compromises your credibility.
I think he is referencing the EV London taxis, I remember reading about long charging times.
@@karthik11512 Thanks for the clarification. I didn't hear the word London directly linked to taxi, probably because a 3 hour charge time was unimaginable.
Keep in mind that for London taxis conventional DC quick chargers are also more constrained as far as where they can be installed than Momentum Dynamics' system because of the amount of space they take up above ground, and how close the power electronics feeding the chargers needs to be. So that means likely that there can't be as many of them, and they're less likely to be conveniently placed. That reduced availability means there's more time added to keeping the car charged due to increased time to get to and from the charger, plus queuing for it if it's busy. Traffic in London moves very slowly for much of the working day in a lot of London's busy taxi service area, so a charger doesn't have to be much further away to add significant delay.
@@eclecticcyclist This. My car has no problem charging at 250KW even when it's 0°C or below. Preconditioning is key to fast charging.
@@eclecticcyclist That's why I lead with "This." I was just trying to reinforce your point. 🙂
It’s highly efficient but we have cooling loops. Go figure that one out…
90% efficency still means 2.5kW is dissipated in a relatively small volume at each end. That'll require cooling.
@@bikingvikingstudios Exactly, but 7.5kW dissipation @ 75kW - the rated power. 90% of 75kW. That's a lot of power loss, like running an electric shower!
17:00 50kW down a 30m cable is going to either be lossy or need a crap-ton of copper
Even worse at 85kHz
The skin effect is a real PITA. 😁
What would be worse?
I find this somewhat hard to believe considering the much larger distances that similar amounts of power routinely travels in much of the existing grid. I live in a condo and as far as I know there's only single-phase 230V AC into my apartment and the 26 other apartments in the building, all coming from a single 400V 3-phase intake to the building, fed by a transformer station some ~70 meters away.
Now I don't know how the rectifier works, but it certainly is no diode-based thing and I'm guessing it is some power MOSFET sort of thing, which makes me think the DC voltage it feeds to the car can easily be whatever you want quite independently of the AC voltage used for the inductive power transfer. Using a high voltage on the AC side means pretty moderate current would suffice, and hence you wouldn't need so much copper either..?
I'm not really sure, but generally a lot of old electrical systems are just hopelessly inefficient and quite stupid designs in our time and age. Boats are only now starting to escape from 6V systems that require massive (and extra expensive, because of the corrosion-resistance they need to have to survive in a sea water environment) components. That probably stems from the batteries once used in boats but it lingered for decades after the reason to have this voltage no longer applied.
IDK, but it seems a bit unbelievable that sending 50 kW of power down 30 m of cabling without expensive cables or huge losses should really be beyond technically possible.
@@dojohansen123 Exactly. Nobody's saying they're sending the 52 kW down the 30 m cable at 85 kHz. They could transmit it at 2 kVAC 50 Hz for all we know, and the hardware to convert back to lower voltage AC 85 kHz could be under the road right next to the plate.
They've got an ex-NASA lead tech who worked on power systems for the International Space Station where high power and efficiency are vital to maintaining life support systems. It's not a huge leap to believe they can figure out how to carry more than 50 kW over 30 metres underground with minimal losses!
Benefit is mostly less wear and tear on cable connectors and lower maintenance cost on infrastructure. Everyone knows that some people are unable to handle hardware and will destroy everything they touch.
1) After 30 minutes, I still do not know what the claimed efficiency is. So to charge batteries at 50KWh, how much power the charger will consume to produce that 50KWh? The previous video claims 99.9%!
2) @2:05 claiming the air gap is not the source of loss, so 6ft air gap will still transfer the same power with 6" air gap? If that the case, this company should make the phone and electronics device charger too, it will sell like hot cake! As you experience with Qi charger, you have to have the phone right on the pad where it is marked on the charger.
3) How do they actually handle the heat since the road which can get really hot in the summer?
I like wireless charging concept.
But.... NASA, efficiency , no parts, no loss..... luxery, premium, REPEAT and you will get the people.....
Can't wait for a can to go under a car and stop charging.
@@Lueeee While there are moving parts there's a difference between the kind of moving parts in a pantograph and the kind in a Momentum Dynamics system. Both require cooling, which does require a pump, though depending on the pump could involve under ten moving parts if you use fluid bearings, but that's pretty much it, and it's not exposed to the elements. The rest of it is designed not to move. A pantograph not only has the arm/frame that moves, and the conductor, but also the cooling loop itself is flexing along with the arm every time it goes to make or break contact. And most of those are in the open. The amount of maintenance involved is not really comparable.
kW. Not KWh.
The air gap is not a power sink, since it's only some air which can't heat up. So there isn't any loss because of the air gap itself.
The air gap affects the coil coupling however and the resonant frequency between the two. With an air gap too distant you can just not transfer that much power, but it's not directly related to the efficiency of the transfer.
As we have seen in the I-Pace video yesterday, they have optimized the coils for even larger air gap than the ground clearance of the I-Pace. So when liftig the airride they got even more power transferred. It's all about coil and core geometry with the right frequency.
1:55 "more efficient grid to vehicle than any cable-based charger." I'm calling Bullshit on this. Show us the actual measurements.Your last vid showed an air-conditioning unit to cool the drive electronics - if it needs that much cooling there's no way it's more efficient than a cable based system.
yeah, i already asked for actual data on the previous video. i call BS on this whole thing as well.
I think that they're hiring that under the improvements that may be possible by reducing battery size. Similar for claiming the need for two buses to cover a days use; doesn't happen in Shenzhen. Marketing speak.
@@MarkGovier battery size is irrelevant when looking at charging efficiency.
100% BS from the man who admitted he is not technically minded and then goes on to say he's a chartered engineer!
You are calling bullshit so you need to provide data that proves otherwise.
For sure there is MORE conversion involved here than in cable DC chargers: the grid delivers 50Hz AC, that needs to be rectified an then converted to AC 85kHz. That's a different AC then the grid delivers. That just adds to the difficulty of proving the efficiency claim. But bring forward some numbers and we'll rediscuss!
Also, I tend to agree to the many comments about marketing BS... there are lots of valid arguments abused to support the wireless case.
But, again, for a fair evaluation numbers are required.
So an element of rectification is actually in the car? Is that being included in the referred-to high efficiency? Or is the high efficiency purely in getting the energy across the air gap?
@@reeshar1234 yes, necessarily. You need to feed the battery with a constant current that lies within the limits of what the battery can accept, at the current state of charge/temperature. If the charger could deliver more than what the battery can take, it needs to limit the current. Otherwise it can supply to the maximum of its operating specs of voltage and current.
For example, many 50kW chargers are limited to 125A. If the battery voltage is too low, these "50kW" chargers don't even reach the max power of 50kW because the current hits the charger's limit.
On the opposite end a huge 350kW charger will, for most of the charging, limit the current to what the battery can take, much below the charger's max current rating. Current is fixed, voltage follows whatever the battery's momentary voltage is at that SoC.
I think the ratio of adjectives to numbers in this guy's pitch gives some reason to be a bit skeptical. But that said, he is absolutely right about the big picture. Wireless charging is not inherently inefficient (wireless transfer of power of course happens multiple times upstream, in transformers, anyway), it greatly simplifies the "autonomous car goes off to charge" problem, it definitely can enable taxis, buses, and city delivery vans to get away with using smaller battery packs, it has the potential to shift and spread the car-charging related demand for electricity in time, and it certainly is a much more elegant solution that can be completely invisible and eliminate the minor hassle of plugging in and unplugging again.
I am not so sure it will be cost-effective to equip all or most cars with a receiver with sufficient capacity to ever replace cables for fast-charging, but for parking spaces, especially at home where cars usually stay overnight, high speed would be mostly pointless anyway, so I don't consider this much of a problem.
Personally, I'd love to have wireless charging at home, provided it isn't extremely fuzzy about where I park - so that charging becomes something you simply need not think of except for the very long trips. The sheer convenience would be awesome, and I would maintain a SoC more optimal for long term battery health than I do today, where staying in the 50-60% window is perfectly possible, but only if I plug in every time I've used the car.
👍
Great video brother 👍🏼👌🏽very informative
Looks promising, but I would prefer our honest Bjorn, as their marketing department just providing the numbers....
[18:33] Keep in mind, this marketing guy is talking about a bus service with 100% uptime, not his chargers.
Sounds like that sales person is full of bs.
100%
That's the problem he is salesperson not scientist.
As he stated more than once he is a trained chartered engineer which means he has had to train at a university or equivalent. He is acting as a salesman naturally but not an ignorant salesman which is what we usually get!
@@johnodell5310 He didn’t know the switching frequency and said he was non technical too, which is perplexing. Perhaps he’s a chartered civil engineer? Certainly not electrical.
For your phone there are magnetic charging cables. An appropriate tiny magnetic connection adaptor (eg usb C) is inserted into the phone and left there. The cable then can make a magnetic connection to the phone eliminating the stress and wear on the phone's usb connection. All the cables that I've seen also have an LED at the charging end so the connection can easily be made in the dark by touching the lighted magnetic end to the phone connector. The only disadvantage is that it's only for charging, not for data which is not usually a problem with data by WiFi or Bluetooth, otherwise the magnetic connector can be removed if necessary for a data cable connection. I've had to replace a phone's connector due to wear at a substantial cost and this eliminates the problem. The magnetic cables all come with several of each type of usb connector and are available everywhere.
A major reason from a societal point of view for transition to EVs is energy efficiency. The little I remember from my physics class tell me that wireless charging must be less efficient than wired charging by a considerable amount... there will be heat loss.
They claim 99.9% and you can also see that it needs AC in the room to keep the system cool. ua-cam.com/video/aq7SP18sPKw/v-deo.html
Heating up is the opposite of efficiency. If it's highly efficient, I would not expect a lot of heat losses / heat build up. But I would still prefer to hear the real numbers on efficiency, rather than statements like "we're better than anything else".
Yep, it needs AC to keep system cool as shown in the video. 99.9% per the video @3:40 ua-cam.com/video/aq7SP18sPKw/v-deo.html
A good sales talk 😄
LFP makes the concern about battery life, even less of an issue, but great to see different methods out there.
Getting nerdy:
Control signal is most likely a type of Frequency Modulation, taken from wireless communication tech.
Handshake is most likely authentication against an private cert on car. Not dissimilar to auth IMEI/base station ->network gateway.
Most likely, a new simpler, time-restricted symmetrical key/session/Auth token is used during charging and can follow the car during driving + charging.
Cutting down auth-time to minimal, but leaving a log of charge provided (micro charges)
Installation at traffic lights is very exciting
This is amazing technology ! Bring it on please :-)
And what is the installation cost to fit these in the ground with cable trenches etc, it won’t be cheap and also pantographs have very, very few movimg and servicable parts, it’s mainly the conductor bars that can be worn. Cable chargers that are down are usually due to the charging unit itself, not the fact that it is a cable charger and many chargers have extremely consistent up-time
My electric toothbrush is charging extremely slowly, about 18 hours. The beard trimmer is charged with cord in a couple of hours. However, they cannot be compared with magnetic resonance, which is way more effective. Of course, the converter requires cooling, just as with all equipment for charging, regardless of technology.
Nevertheless, I am a little concerned about the overall efficiency. Is the loss really less with two coils than with a directly connected cable?
The convenience and reliability are obvious, but how does it work in rural areas?
Claiming 99.9% efficiency @3:40 ua-cam.com/video/aq7SP18sPKw/v-deo.html
It would be pretty smart in cities around taxi-parking, traffic light intersections and possibly even on highways prone to still standing traffic during rush hour.
Pleaser tell us the cost of the energy as well as the cost of the retro-fit
I want to see info man. What if the car is not on center with the charger. How will this handle road traffic. Ok you have a 4 year uptime on bus charges but at what cost. What about places where it gets below freezing. Also air gap is a problem it's why we need 10Kw radio towers.
You can watch how these pads work in reality on Two Bit Davinci channel. But claims about efficiency seems to be to good to be true. Even when there are some losses in DC sent through cable that shouldn't be more than missaligment of charging and reciving pads.
When he said air gap is not a problem it's red flag to me. Must be magic.
Does the efficiency which Momentum dynamics is taking about consider also the AC/DC conversion in the car?
Classic ioniq is back in the game💪🏼
One missing Question:
How are they going to implement on the fly charging on roads outside the Cities on rural parts in the Scandinavia..
Most likely rollout according to economy, location and # of pax.
Urban areas have a larger problem with allocating space for stuff, and value it accordingly.
Few rural ppl will pay for the additional up front cost of induction charging when cable charging works
If you have Tesla you have all the range and chargingpeed you need for Taxi operations here in Norway. This is no problem.
But how are the Jaguar taxi’s doing in Oslo in real life?
I miss clear answers (including weight, for example) from Momentum Dynamics!
1. Yes, please to third-party testing, including with a Tesla.
2. How much is the gross loss in wireless charging compared to cable charging in different EVs? at 11 kW / 50 kW / +120 kW.
3. Prices of wireless systems at 11 kW / 50 kW / +120 kW.
4.How many wireless modules does Momentum Dynamics produce today/year? When does Momentum Dynamics expect to mass-produce wireless chargers? And how much cheaper will the wireless modules be?
5. Is the primary target group taxis and buses?
6. Is the AC generated after the wireless charger in the car of a quality that does not strain/damage the AC/DC converter in the car?
7. What is the loss (in %) in the module I mentioned in point 6 ?
8. Can this wireless system function as V2G (Vehicle-to-Grid)? What is the energy loss in % (from the grid to the car to the grid)?
Are they on the stock market ?
How much it costs?
Charger/ Receiver
Not cheap which is why the current focus on commercial fleets and public transportation. It only makes sense for private owner usage when the technology is standardized something like CSS Plug-and-Charge. In addition, the price for a vehicle charging pad and installation needs to come down significantly. Once that happens, OEM's can add charging pads as an option or at least make it easy to install one after vehicle purchase.
Sounds great to me, but we have a lot of people around here that are afraid of even "smart" meters. They are going to freak out about high power, high frequency inductive car charging...
And 5g! :-)
Man, just wait until they find out that smart phones have electronics in them too. . . Better put those foil gloves on! 😁
There are some 'moving' parts in a transformer. The laminations vibrate and will be moving a little.
Very much a sales person. No need to be a critic for London Taxis and cable solutions. This is a heavy weight solution that should focused on Buses and HGVs.
IF IT WORKS then once you have made it work with bus fleets it will then naturally spread to other use cases.
this should NOT be used for buses. the losses are just stupid high.
Need to introduce a standard place to put a pad on a vehicle... long vehicles could have multiple reciever pads? ...then at traffic intersections also have the transmission pads at the same distances - with appropriate road markings.
if you have a ZOE and then EQS you loose a lot of parking space between the vehicles with one coil every ~10m
A high efficiency is possible if the system uses resonant switching. But the problem with the current fixed frequency standards of 85 khz for wireless charging is so stupid and makes the thing inefficient. Long story short, a fixed frequency wireless charger is only efficient at one or a few operating points and not the entire charging curve. I dont know who came up with the standards but a variable frequency will not only be efficient over the entire range but also cheaper since there is no need to have a matching network to achieve fixed frequency operation.
Unfortunately there are a lot of protected frequencies in the LF range, here are a few:
MSF 60 kHz +/-250 Hz 42 dBμA/m United Kingdom
RBU 66.6 kHz +/-750 Hz 42 dBμA/m Russian Federation
HBG 75 kHz +/-250 Hz 42 dBμA/m Switzerland
DCF77 77.5 kHz +/-250 Hz 42 dBμA/m Germany
DCF49 129.1 kHz +/-500 Hz 42 dBμA/m Germany
Thought I'd better share it quick before it disappeared, like the NIO battery swap interview the other day, was probably about ip or editing issues, I suspect
Ioniq 28kwh would be perfect for this concept thank you @Bjørn Nyland
No way!!! Right in the first words a lie from the "Momentum Dynamics" / John Holland?
Sorry but it will NEVER be better efficiency than a simple cable. This is just impossible.
But thanks to Björn to digg deeper and try to ask the right questions again and again.
(I will not say it's impossible or bad, just it's not the best and NOT efficienc)
I think that is why after 30 minutes he still does not provide the number but instead bragging about guys from NASA, etc.
I can imagine in the future where there are charging lanes where you drive for a few minutes and you get charged to your car via wireless technology
First question: how about use of onboard charger of EV? Just add wireless pad underneath, and connect to onboard charger. I know it will be less powerfull than 50kW, but definetly will be cheaper.
Second: what about using this super efficient rectifiers istead of onboard charger? This can be super upgrade option for many cars, in this example IPace will be able charging with Type2 AC up to 43 kW
He said the receiver coil uses DC
SO when charging at 75kW:
90% Efficient = a loss of 7.5kW
95% Efficient = a loss of 3.75kW
That's a lot of losses. One suspects they are using some very creative and theoretical accounting in their numbers. Plus the losses will be much higher over a 30m cable.
The 30m cable is not something critical, as that part can be "super thick" cable, even considering skin effect at 85kHz, that is "easy".
What I wonder about in the coil on the road and under the car, how thick cable is there?
I still want to see the real number from them, not the "very efficiency" talk.
The 90% or more efficiency claim, we need to know measured from where to where. 90% is a pretty good number all in all. A very optimized DC-DC converter under 1kW that hits 95% is something to talk about.
Finally someone cares about the battery life. Tesla: Give us a slow charge option with Superchargers, if the location is empty. Sometimes I have time(SC directly beside a good restaurant) and could slow charge.
Remember that in an electrical induction motor, electrical cables are wound around the iron in the motor. This transfers energy across an air gap to an aluminum / iron rotor. First you want to magnetize the iron in the rotor. Then this iron will induce current in the aluminum bars which will amplify the magnetic field in the rotor.
The only difference is that air gap between the car and the basement is greater. But this has to do with the type of iron you magnetize. Remember there are iron that can transfer 1000 of hertz and there are iron that can transfer 1-10 hertz. It's all about iron type. The thing here is to make the iron type that is best for transferring energy over distance. We talk about 20-30 centimeters. Example is here....
ua-cam.com/video/xEUnBNL8Dyk/v-deo.html&ab_channel=CPESVT
If wireless charging were as good as he claims, it would surely be on the superchargers already. 😊
It will be!
This reguires huge parking spaces or very acurate parking habits which is often not the case..
"Autonomous cars must charge automatically" Really? can't they be plugged in during their cleaning stops? In bad weather that could be after every ride or so. Honestly this is innovation without a market.
When will they bring this for home use? Its great if youre a fleet owner, but what about the rest of us that hate cables? :P
We now have around 11mio. EVs in the world that cannot use this tech. So 11mio. EVs that are not allowed to use the parking space that induction spots take up. Not speaking of ICE vehicles.
But for sure wireless charging will come to play its own part, but it’s no major issue with cable chargers in cities, there are just too few of them
EV adoption is accelerating every year. Exponential not linear. The only limiting factor is batteries.
The number of electric vehicles and types of vehicles and trucks is growing.
Many people are holding off buying a new car or scooter until the electric vehicle they want becomes available.
Electric vehicles are just better. No noise, no emissions, less fuel costs, less maintenance costs and amazing technology. Gasoline and diesel are OLD polluting technology. So last century. Electric cars, electric trucks, electric buses, electric trash haulers, electric snow blowers, electric lawn mowers, electric weed whackers, electric hedge trimmers, electric snow mobiles, electric water craft, electric garden tools, electric mechanic tools, electric motor cycles, electric bicycles, electric scooters, electric farm tractors, electric construction equipment, electric delivery vehicles, ...... everything is going electric. No worries about starting after sitting for a few months. Gas always needs repairs. If you care about the future for your children care about climate change
So if I trip and fall onto one of their charging spots it will destroy my pacemaker, then turn off, then hopefully my phone still works so I can dial 911 with the last 15 seconds of my life.
Maybe instead it should always be in an off state until it communicates with a vehicle then it turns on. That way I only die if I am already under the car. And if I’m already under the car I have more things to worry about than their charging pad.
I think that is how it works - low power radio loop to communicate with vehicle and then powers up once it has been activated by a valid account - just the same as current chargers communicate with the car before opening the power.
I hope so. At 11 minutes and 45 seconds he does a terrible job explaining that.
“What do you call a thousand salesman chained together at the bottom of the ocean?”
“A good start.”
:-)
20:40. This is very disingenuous. Every EV owner I know uses time of use billing. Our power company gives a discount for charging when energy is plentiful and cheap. If anything, this system will be worse for the grid as vehicles will be charging more during peak times. That being said, I do think this product has its merits in the right use case.
Edit: fixed spelling mistakes
True, but bear in mind many of the current EV owners are still considered early adopters. It remains to be seen if the general public will give two figs about delaying charging until overnight, or even waiting a couple of days until the grid carbon emissions are going to be lower.
@@nettlesoup Would you delay charging to save %50 on your fuel bill? Most people I see will wait in line to save %1 on a gallon of gasoline.
I agree this statement was a bit of a negative on what was a fairly positive discussion up until that point. Off-peak time charging is a simple solution that requires no major changes or capital investment. "EVs are bad for the grid" is a myth that anti-EV types use, the fact he's willing to jump on that bandwagon to market his product is a bit questionable.
I imagine a future when you have a charger like this in your garage and you never have to worry about plugging your car in, that would be grat.
I see a big opportunity on this application, too.
Yes! Finally a working solution.
But do they have any intention of implementing this into highways to charge vehicles on the go, as well? I mean, they should alternate some smaller versions of these pads at a regular distance and supply just enough power to sustain the higher highway consumption. It would be very useful, especially for hauling trucks
Anyways, seems like a good start
You're not an engineer, are you? Let's do a very rough calculation. Let's assume that the transmitter and receiver are the same size and have a length of 1m. At 108 km/h (30 m/s) the car will travel that 1 m in 1/30th of a second. But both the transmitter and receiver will overlap 80% of their length for only 40% of that time, which is only 0.013 seconds. At 50 kW, this time would be enough to get 0.18 Wh. If we assume a consumption of 180Wh/km, then we need to have 1000 of these chargers per kilometer, which basically means that the entire road must be made of induction chargers. Now imagine how much that would cost.
Regarding the efficiency claim, plugin charging can be made more efficient if cost is not a concern. Just use very expensive compoenets to lower losses. Wireless charging has more components and in theory can never beat plugin efficiency. In the real world, cost is a primary driver and that is why plugin charging don't push for 95%. Dynamic wireless charging has too much safety issues and is too far from now..
Although wireless charging is for sure convenient, it can't be more efficient than cable charging - that's physics.
Everything is efficient, it can be 0.1% efficient or 99% efficient - and I dispute claims of 99% efficiency from previous video.
It might very well be that with the high frequency range they are using for charging is unaffected by water, snow ice and most of the dirt.
Previously they stated that the bigger the gap the better the efficiency - this is a BS statement.
All the marketing mumbo, jumbo coming from the mouth of "I am not the engineer" guy is the first red flag, claims they are saying are unrealistic with the tech we have. This is reminiscent of the solar roadways BS, and I fear there is some clever, forward looking politician, that is just eager to commission this BS solution for wider use, paid with taxpayers money.
If something looks too be good to be true it probably is = 100% efficient statement
your tax money has already been spent on it. There are tests in the US right now with busses.
Also 50% energy losses in best case scenario, imagine the other 50 % energy from the grid is lost in the air
Not much power is lost in air as it cannot be heated up with 85kHz magnetic field
This sounds like the future of how EV's charge :)
no, its the sound of a salesman lying his guts out.
There has to be some catch otherwise Tesla would've pursued wireless charging
The permissions required for the installations were probably prohibitive, I think Tesla's coast to coast North American charging network might still not be complete if they had chosen to use induction chargers. It certainly looks good for a robo-taxi fleet though.
The catch is smaller batteries to make room for the coil and electronics. There are also the issues of interference from metal objects that was glanced over. This is highly speculative technology. Tesla made the right choice not to pursue it.
high loss and longer charge times problems with obstructions.
Dont mind the fact that this is much more expensive then a 50 kw charger and also cars will become heavier and worse airo shape it keeps on
Electromagnetic induction
Looks like it has a future 👍
This is BS. Even if this wasn't a really wasteful solution to charging vehicles, you can only really fill the roads with these things in densely populated areas, where range is not a problem at all to begin with. Can someone please give me one use case for this product that justifies the insane cost of implementing this system, instead of just plugging in at superchargers and not wasting electricity running coolers to get a slower charging speed?
Use case? You got me there. I'm still trying to work out what the problem is they are trying to solve! Surely AV Taxis will need cleaning every few trips, they can be plugged in then.
I'm thinking police, EMS, etc. If electrification of these vehicles is to happen, a solution will be needed where the operator can drive away without taking the time to disconnect a cable. Maybe I'm thinking too pie in the sky, but having EVs for these applications would be massively more efficient than having engines idling all day.
One honest benefit I can see with a system such as this is eliminating connector wear for vehicles that would need to always be charging.
@@mvansumeren4313 I can’t think of any use case at all batteries are getting so cheap especially LFP sales vehicles just will not require charging very often. Besides which emergency vehicles Bei had to go quite long distances for serious incidents, saysay on the motorway all required to be standby for a considerable amount of time, so will in a case require large batteries.
Next: heat scavenging for the charging pad to heat cabin and battery.
Interesting concept but I am put off by all the marketing bs and sky high promises. Always be suspicious of sweet talking British marketers ;)
Lotsa negative comments about wireless charging. Agreed, the guy MD sent to talk to Bjorn wasn't the best representative; but I think wireless could play a big role in EV infrastructure within the city. It doesn't need to be perfect from an efficiency standpoint, just "good enough". If MD can scale the system shown in Bjorn's other video, including the rapid user account handshakes, they might have a product that has reached that point. Don't underestimate the value of convenience.
Wouldn't it be odd if after all we have seen of charging infrastructure development in Bjorn's videos, that the EV future ended up being ubiquitous wireless charging pads to support city travel; and battery swapping stations for road trips? Of course, that would require everyone involved to agree to implement a sheeeeit-load of standards in their products, so who knows if
it can happen. The only sure thing is that Norway will reach EV Nirvana first.
I expect this system to be 10-20 % less efficient than cable-based charging. This means that several thousand watts are burned for the convenience not to plug in a cable. Also it would cost several euros extra per battery charge. In addition the needed hardware is expensive. The inefficiency may even lead governments to regulate this technology.
1:55 .."more efficient grid to vehicle than any cable based charger" Bullshit!
Maybe if you don't account for the AC-DC converter inside the vehicle but this would be so misleading that it's basically a lie.
Previous claims 99.9% @3:40 ua-cam.com/video/9IoPA0rq0yw/v-deo.html
I'm calling this BS for now
you can call it BS forever until someone finds a way to break the laws of physics.
Shopping centre carparks
Reminds me abit of the early TV pilots with a cable. Ofcourse anyone understands this is the future if charging and will make all the difference where you have a charger at your home in your own garage. No station anymore just drive home.
OMG Panic!! only 89 % efficient !!
Spending 400% to 500% of same energy to move a gas car - OKAY, that's fine, it's old and gold: just takes 5 mins to "recharge"
No, it's not fine. This is why EVs are developed. Wasting several kWh in an EV to save a few seconds is also not fine.
I have being saying this for years, but don't understand why Tesla hasn't gone this way.
Because it's not efficient
@@geertweynjes2119 Yes thought so , too good to be true .
Yeah, and many others, too. I think the problem is an absence of all-around specialists. Besides of being higly qualified in electro-chemistry, material science, power electronics, one would have to be an exceptional RF systems engineer, which is a vast field on it's own. And it's not how electrical engineers are trained nowadays, probably.
Sounds like the future, now we just need industry standard so any brand can use them. Less battery, less consumption, longer range, more agile car etc.
Just amazing. As Elon said, the best cable is no cable (charging). Please guys, talk with Elon asap.
they wont because its a bunch of BS.
@@SupremeRuleroftheWorld pls, explain your reasoning, not more bs
@@ovi9610 please read the other comments here. its explained enough already. even a cursury glance at RF and basic electronics will make you understand the guy is selling hot air.
@@SupremeRuleroftheWorld ok, maybe he's a sale person. Promising but too early to be all true ? More deep testing please. 4 years charging wireless buses without a fail, ...maybe is fake or the best invention for EV charging.
Many skepticism comments. Too good to be true ? Please, more neutral deep testing needed in all conditions.
Wireless is bad and waste 60% of the energy. And should not be used.
Either this or a self charging Toyota
Wireless charging is bs that wastes giant amounts of energy, even just for phones.
17:20 It’s good for the city, no cables, a clean pedestrian zone, etc. And what about radiation? Everyone skips that problem. 50KW of wireless power transmission is fucking dangerous, it's a strong magnetic field. It is dangerous to sit in a car or walk past a car while the car is charging. Technology ahead of health = success, nope.
What is so dangerous about it? We use electromagnetic fields for all manner of things. Things only get potentially dangerous to biological life when you get into the microwave range (~900-2500 MHz (millions of cycles per second)) as it can cause diathermic heating. EM radiation within the ~85 KHz (thousands of cycles per second) used for this is several orders of magnitude short of being able to be dangerous to anything other than a metallic object that gets between the transmitter and receiver. Also, if you're getting confused with ionizing radiation, that stuff doesn't start until well after the hundreds of THz (trillions of cycles per second) range. Just remember, all radiation isn't made equal. *Ionizing* radiation is the nasty stuff that makes bad things happen to us meat bags. 😁
@@mvansumeren4313 @12:12 It will stop if it detects any metal because the metal will get hot, so when car is on top would it then do nothing so how does it know if the car can be charged or not since the hand shake is also done via the magnetic filed power that is used for charging?
Also one would need to generate quite a field to transfer this amount of energy. Especially if it's from the ground and up. Probably good if your not planning to make babies any time soon.
McDonald's drive through would a good spot.
Then the pad has to be in the same spot on all cars so that you are exactly right in front of the window.
@@sharky07xy I see that would not work. Just a thought!
@@sharky07xy The same problem would happen at a stop light, would it not?
@@lesbendo6363 yes and every parking spot. imagine two short EVs like ZOE. using up a lot of parking room.
I hate people like this. They not only say their vision of the future is better but the also say no one’s else’s vision of the future will work. His statement that having cars driving around with 700Kg of batteries can not work. My response to that is shut the hell up. Yes it can. And quit bashing the other electric car designs. Yours sounds great. But I want a car that can drive 500 miles on a dirt road. That car is now possible in electric versions. You spreading lies that it can’t work doesn’t actually boost your technology it boosts the fossil full industry. So stop spreading those lies.
Pure bullshit!! Persuing wireless charging for anything is irresponsible in every single way. Even more so for high power transfers. The benefits of saving 20 sec to attach a cable is to small to defend the massive use of resources both from a economical and environmental standpoint. Massive amounts of copper and energy in the form of powerlosses and manufacturing etc completely wasted in order to save seconds of inconvenience.
If you Björn have any interest in representing a environmentally friendly or at least intelligent consumer, you would see through this BS!
@@ulf5738 The cost and resources needed for the hardware to enable wireless charging will always be wasteful compared to the benefit. Specially for buses and taxis that do a lot of kms/energy and thereby the powerlosses will be very costly.
By the time this wireless technology is on, the battery capacity will double and make it obsolete.
I wouldn't buy steak knives from this guy. He's annoying.
Charge cars at 6.00PM? Who does that? Every EV driver I know (including my wife and I) charges overnight. Is he saying that his wireless charger does not operate after 6pm? Mega BS here.