• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    14 days ago

    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.

    • DasFaultier@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

    • thefactremains@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      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.

      • officermike@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        14 days ago

        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.

        • Windex007@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          14 days ago

          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.

        • Q*Bert Reynolds@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          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.

      • postnataldrip@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        14 days ago

        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.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        14 days ago

        Stop burning the planet down to generate social media comments about shit you don’t understand

        • real_squids@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          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.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            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.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      You can talk horsepower and dogpower all day, but I won’t really understand until you convert it to bananapower, for scale.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    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?

    • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      14 days ago

      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?

      • MangoCats@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        14 days ago

        . 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.

          • MangoCats@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            13 days ago

            It’s so sad, because we could make really great shitbox econo cars now. China, Japan and India are doing it, meanwhile in the U.S. we’re needing side-step assistance to climb into our tower-viewing position $80K+ ROADMASTER trucks and SUVs.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      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.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        13 days ago

        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.)

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 days ago

          Nah, his complaint was lack of torque.

          Maybe just had torque confused with horsepower? That’s been the historical trade-off between gas and electric. Sure, its very easy to get an electric motor to jump into action. But it is comparatively difficult to generate the same amount of power with equivalent fuel density.

          A gallon of refined gasoline packs insane energy.

          Much of which is lost to heat when combusted, which is the historical hang-up.

          Not that batteries don’t have their own heating problems. But the benefit of batteries is that they’re an engineering problem we can solve with miniaturization, which we’ve become incredibly good at. We’re at a soft ceiling in terms of engine chemistry. Petroleum is about as refined as we’re going to get it. Combustion’s math is what it is. Improvements to the efficiency of modern engines have stalled out as an automotive tool, even to the point that a gas engine powering an electric capacitor in a hybrid yields performance improvements over the gas engine just spinning the wheels directly.

        • erusuoyera@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          I would love to replace work van with an electric one, but so far it’s not possible for one main reason (other than cost)…I often tow quite heavy trailers and my diesel can tow 2500kg, but every electric van I’ve looked at can only tow 750kg. Maybe it’s something to do with that?

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      14 days ago

      He was trying to say that he spent too much time in a media bubble disconnected from reality.

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        13 days ago

        These same idiots tell me my hybrid battery will only last 20,000 miles a cost $50,000 to replace. Yeah sure.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          Yea I’ve been hearing that one since 2003 with my original Prius. That battery lasted 23 years before it crapped out, and modern battery tech is waaaaay better than that thing. Also it wouldn’t have been that much money to refurbish the battery if it hadn’t been too smashed up to bother.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      Electric motors don’t have a torque curve like ICE, which is why they don’t need a transmission. Those massive submarines run on electric motors.

    • Geobloke@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      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

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      12 days ago

      I’ll give them some credence based on the cars their motors are already used in and the fact that their parent company is Mercedes-Benz. Doesn’t look like they’re a bunch of grifters seeking investment.

      • chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        I suppose, but I’m skeptical of car manufacturer claims, too, until independent testing is done.

        I hope this is real and think it’s awesome, but will wait to see if they exaggerated.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 days ago

          Well, the peak output is a useless number, that’s just record chasing. I think the continuous output is the number we should be looking at. That is a bit more believable and also started in the article that that number is an estimate for now.

          So IMO they’re not making any wild claims. There’s “we measured this huge output for a short burst” and “we think that over a long period, it can do this slightly smaller, but still impressive number, but it needs to be verified”

          Will be cool to find out if the continuous output is close to their estimate of course, but even if it’s lower, it’s still impressive by virtue of the super low weight.

  • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    Ah good thing the batteries are not the heavy part of the system otherwise this would be awkward.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        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?

        • Blum0108@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          13 days ago

          ~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?

            • Dave.@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              13 days ago

              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.

              • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                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.

        • MangoCats@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          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.

            • MangoCats@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              13 days ago

              Bonus: you can always circle back and pick up the recharge pack, and if you put solar cells on top it can trickle in a (tiny) extra charge when you’re away. More practical: plug it into the grid for slow charging of your big batteries while you zip around town in your lightweight configuration.

              • No1@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                Imagine if you called the trailer your ‘house’ and left it in the one place all the time!

                • MangoCats@feddit.it
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  13 days ago

                  A really small house can hold 50 gallons of diesel and a generator, be towed to a filling station, and follow you thousands of miles…

                  If you want a 200 mile round-trip limited EV that you always charge at home, you can buy those today from all kinds of sellers.

        • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 days ago

          Making the motor lighter gives weight allowance for the onboard BESS. This could allow more batteries to be installed on the same car, increasing range and power/torque, so long as the volume of the car allows that same BESS increase.

          It’s still good progress. I don’t understand your POV where we must focus on the BESS first and make that more efficient, both in terms of weight, volume, power, and energy, then move on to other things.

          We can do that in parallel and see faster improvements.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    13 days ago

    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.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      That’s how EVs started! Sorta.

      This is from a Porsche in 1900:

      in hub motor

      old porsche hybrid

      And some 2000s EVs tried it. But it’s impractical.

      • It increases unsprung weight, e.g. weight not cushioned by suspension. Bad for ride/handling/steering feel.

      • All that vibration is HARD on the motor. Read: unreliable.

      • Motor is more exposed to temperature/dust. Again, reliability.

      In reality, a decent suspension needs a lot of room under the body anyway. An axle to get the motor in the body is dirt cheap on the rear, and still pretty cheap on the front, and you could just mount this thing sideways to make it flat…

    • Canopyflyer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      13 days ago

      That would be a lot of unsprung weight.

      Handling and ride quality are dramatically and negatively impacted by every bit of weight that is not held up by the suspension. That’s why higher performance cars will have lightweight wheels. Rather than steel wheels you see on lower performance cars.

      It’s better to just put all the heavy drive components inboard on the chassis and run drive shafts to the wheels.

      You see motors in the hubs of bicycles, because they really don’t go that fast. So even if the bike has a suspension, it’s not that big of a deal. Motorcycles on the other hand would need to keep any heavy parts inboard.

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

        Steel wheels haven’t been common on anything but really cheap cars for a few decades now, but in general your point holds true. There’s heavier and lighter alloy wheels out there.

        Still, these could be just tiny motors connected to the wheels via a short shaft on the rear especially. Instead of the huge monstrosities most EVs currently seem to use which are huge, as they also include gearing and such. Still leaves more space for battery without having to go unsprung with hub motors.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      PS

      One issue I hadn’t thought of is putting traditional brakes (which generate a ton of heat) right next to the motors. Again, we’re just asking for mechanical issues here, and we’re ballooning unsprung mass to mitigate it, especially in heavier cars that take a lot to stop.

      The entire floor pan could just be one thin battery, and everything above it could be passenger and storage space.

      This seems like a minor thing, but the control electronics for the motors takes up a nontrivial amount of space. So do “traditional” subsystems like hydraulics, climate control, or an old fashioned car battery (which often exists in parallel to the EV drivetrain).

      Theres also safety to consider. A traditional sedan “hood,” even a small one, is easier on standing pedestrians, so it hits their legs and they flop on top, instead of slamming them like a wall (as a bus-like front would).

    • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 days ago

      Aptera wanted to do this with their flagship Solar Electric Vehicle (SEV).

      IIRC, they switched to an outwheel motor because of the weight the inwheel motors added to the wheels. Could be wrong tho

        • lemming741@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          mass market
          There’ll be 1,980 of these built

          That car is the definition of a party trick. You proved my point, so thank you.

        • lemming741@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 days ago

          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?

          • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 days ago

            Less weight, less parts, 4WD, 4W traction control, more cabin space because no driveshafts.

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        They might work in the rear if used instead of rear brakes. Rears do far less work anyway and brakes are heavy. Powerful electric motors can do a lot of regen, similarly assisting the front brakes.

        I’ve had near 8 kilogram rear brake disks on a diesel wagon, not even a performance car that would require huge brakes, current car is 5. Calipers weigh a bunch too. Pads themselves are light, but still add to the whole setup.

    • Nastybutler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      13 days ago

      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

  • solrize@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    14 days ago

    1000 hp = 0.75 MW. If 98% efficient that’s 15KW of heat dissipation Sounds like a subsystem bigger than the motor.

    • kalkulat@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      13 days ago

      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

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

        EV motors are already over 90% efficient. They don’t piss away evergy as heat like ICE, where about 40% of the gas is wasted as heat and noise.

  • Naz@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    13 days ago

    My eScooter weighs 42 pounds.

    A 28 pound motor that’s 750 kW?

    Holy fuck.

    That’s power density straight out of science fiction

  • comrade19@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    13 days ago

    300-400kW continuously should be the headline. Thats impressive. Lots of motors can try and make 1000hp if you feed them enough voltage but only for a split second before they overheat and burn out. I wonder how long it can do this 1000HP.

  • BilSabab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    13 days ago

    cant wait for corporations to crush the competition with some bullshit yet again and then complain that we’re at peak EV tech anyway

    • metallic_substance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      *guns throttle* Tires and tube liquify, blast apart, rim rapidly grinds to nothing against the pavement, spokes rocket in all directions. Onlookers remark: “pretty cool way to go out…” And then give the 🤘 hand gesture

  • MrSulu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 days ago

    Hopefully the numbers are correct. The article however is shockingly terribly written.

  • Psythik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    13 days ago

    “YASA” sounds like a mashup between YMCA and NASA. Even their logo looks like the Y’s.

  • pahlimur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    14 days ago

    I was going to shit all over this thing, but if it can do ~500hp continuously that’s awesome. Wonder what kind of efficiency it has and what the cooling requirements are. That low weight puts us back into unsprung wheel motor territory, especially if it scales down well.

    • CrayonDevourer@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Oh man, continuous 500hp, 1k short burst at each wheel. I think my car caught fire just thinking about it…

      • RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 days ago

        Every time I get a faster car I need better tyres so the wheels never spin… The fuck kind of tyres would I need to stop 1000hp at each wheel spinning?

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          Just have the marketing department call them “Full Self Sticking” and then they literally can’t lose grip.