Could you create a battery powered plane?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility and challenges of creating battery-powered aircraft, focusing on the dynamics of energy density, weight, and power requirements. Participants explore the current state of battery technology, potential designs for electric engines, and the implications for aviation and environmental concerns.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight the cyclical problem of increasing weight requiring more lift and power, which in turn necessitates more batteries, creating a paradox.
  • Others note that batteries have lower energy density compared to jet fuel, requiring significantly more mass and volume for equivalent energy, which complicates the viability of electric planes.
  • It is mentioned that research into more efficient batteries is ongoing, but the challenges are substantial.
  • Participants discuss the power density of jet engines being much higher than that of electric motors, impacting the overall efficiency and performance of electric aircraft.
  • There is a suggestion that if battery energy density could reach a quarter to half that of jet fuel, electric aircraft could become more competitive for shorter trips.
  • Some participants propose the concept of ducted fans as a potential design for electric engines, drawing parallels to current jet engine designs.
  • One participant shares a thesis that aligns with the discussion's themes, indicating avenues for potential improvements in battery technology.
  • Environmental concerns are raised, with suggestions for alternative solutions such as aviation biofuels and high-speed rail as part of the broader conversation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the challenges of battery-powered aircraft, with no consensus on a definitive solution or approach. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best path forward for electric aviation technology.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on current battery technology and energy density comparisons, as well as unresolved questions about the scalability of electric aircraft designs for larger passenger or commercial applications.

  • #61
mastermechanic said:
There is Solid State Battery technology currently developing and its main problem is the cost to manufacture. They've 2.5x higher energy density than li-on types.

But I, personally, don't see the electricity as the main power source of the world. Considering the current battery tech. flying a 70 tonnes of 737 requires tremendous amount of energy and if that much of energy is packed in a battery form it would weight too much compared to fossil fuel. Specific energy of gasoline is incomparable high compared to batteries.

Second problem with electric powered vehicles is electric motors have low operational life compared to IC or Jet engines. Their maintenance is easy and low cost but in terms of operational hours I think they would require frequent maintenance when they are used in an aircraft.

Agree with everything but the last point, as far as I know electric machines far outlast IC engines and I imagine turbines as well.

If kept within operational (temperature) limits I can't think of anything that would wear out in an emachine other than bearings. There are issues with demagnetization in PM machines if over driven, but this is not really a problem if limits are observed. Where are you getting this idea from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
essenmein said:
Agree with everything but the last point, as far as I know electric machines far outlast IC engines and I imagine turbines as well.

If kept within operational (temperature) limits I can't think of anything that would wear out in an emachine other than bearings. There are issues with demagnetization in PM machines if over driven, but this is not really a problem if limits are observed. Where are you getting this idea from?

Uh, actually they're all sourced by my own experience. I observed that op-life on small DC engines. Small model aircraft DC motors have 1000 hr service life but typical aircraft engine have 15000 hr. Here you may say, "okay, wait, you're comparing a model engine dc motor and jet engine" but the point is I don't think life is not tightly linked to size so the proportion must be conserved.

The thing is you should not design an aircraft having just sufficient amount of power because in this case the engines must operate at full throttle all the time and that cause overheating, vibration etc. Then we must have much more power than needed, so while it's pretty hard to manufacture a electrical motor able to lift a Boeing 737, it's nearly impractical to manufacture a more powerful one.
 
  • #64
  • #65
mastermechanic said:
Uh, actually they're all sourced by my own experience. I observed that op-life on small DC engines. Small model aircraft DC motors have 1000 hr service life but typical aircraft engine have 15000 hr. Here you may say, "okay, wait, you're comparing a model engine dc motor and jet engine" but the point is I don't think life is not tightly linked to size so the proportion must be conserved.

The thing is you should not design an aircraft having just sufficient amount of power because in this case the engines must operate at full throttle all the time and that cause overheating, vibration etc. Then we must have much more power than needed, so while it's pretty hard to manufacture a electrical motor able to lift a Boeing 737, it's nearly impractical to manufacture a more powerful one.

Using small brushed machines with bronze bushings to extrapolate life expectancy of a electric synchronous machine with no brushes and pressure lubricated bearings is a little disingenuous. Just like for IC engines, you can build them so they last a few hundred hours (eg F1 race motors) or last nearly for ever (eg lister diesels).

That Ohio electric link says "Assuming that the motor is being operated under normal conditions, sized correctly for the application and within the manufacturer’s design requirements, it can last 15 years or more. "

Basically, IMO, just like for any machine, there is nothing inherent in electric machines that say no more than 15 years, it depends on design and how its used.

Regarding contamination ingress, salt/moisture etc, this plays havoc on any mechanical thing, neither electric or IC are somehow immune to those effects.

The problem with electric planes is not the machines, its the energy source (battery) that, barring some momentous discovery, makes them impractical IMO.
 
  • #66
gleem said:
Not only is energy density an issue... but also charge rates so that a vehicle can get moving again in a reasonable amount of time.
That's no problem if you have multiple quick-swap battery packs.
 
  • #67
essenmein said:
Agree with everything but the last point, as far as I know electric machines far outlast IC engines and I imagine turbines as well.

If kept within operational (temperature) limits I can't think of anything that would wear out in an emachine other than bearings. There are issues with demagnetization in PM machines if over driven, but this is not really a problem if limits are observed. Where are you getting this idea from?
I agree that electric motors are likely to be reliable with a very long service life, but it's worth noting that turbines dramatically outperform piston engines when it comes to service life and maintenance interval (which is part of why they're popular on aircraft). They really only have 2-3 moving parts, and it's all radially symmetric and spinning smoothly rather than vibrating and oscillating all the time, so there's honestly not much to go wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: essenmein
  • #68
While conceptually simpler than piston engines fanjets are still subject to vibration and much care is required to reduce it to acceptable levels at these high rpm's. In addition they operate at high temperatures are subject to collision with intake debris so metal fatigue and damage are a concern as well as bearing wear. Although overhauls may be every 5000 hours for large engines this may cost millions of dollars per engine. https://www.avbuyer.com/articles/engines-biz-av/what-is-jet-engine-maintenance-112549

Electric motor have that conceptually simple construction and while temperature can be an issue they are protected from debris and metal fatigue. Bearings seem to be the biggest maintenance concern.
 
  • #69
The largest area for debris is the fan which should be very similar in both cases. If I remember correctly the fan is also a common cause of catastrophic engine failure - independent of the power source for the fan.
 
  • #70
I haven't reviewed all the posts on this thread, but here is a development that might be relevant. It is about an all-electric airplane being developed jointly by Harbour Air and MagniX.
 
  • #71
from: IEEE SPECTRUM Jan 2020, pg 47 (SPECTRUM.IEEE.ORG)

ROLLS-ROYCE TO FLY RECORD-BREAKING ELECTRIC PLANE
"In the first quarter of 2020, Rolls-Royce will unveil ACCEL, which it says is the fastest all-electric plane ever designed."

It is a one-seat racing plane.

To break the current 3-year-old speed record of 340KPH (212MPH), they expect a speed of 480KPH, (300MPH). They state that the data acquisition rate is >20 000 points per second to optimize the actively cooled battery system.

"Look to the skies over Britain to see this plane in action."

Now THAT sounds like a bit of a project!

Cheers,
Tom
 
  • #72
Tom.G said:
Now THAT sounds like a bit of a project!
agreed. It would be fun to read about the engineering of that plane.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 139 ·
5
Replies
139
Views
30K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 117 ·
4
Replies
117
Views
11K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K