Recent Comment
Share
The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Navistar are testing drag-reducing devices that could cut big rig fuel use by 12 percent, or 3.4 billion gallons a year. The devices would fit into the areas of the truck that produce the most drag, making it more aerodynamic and reducing the energy needed to propel the truck.
At highway speeds, semi-trucks use more than half of the energy from their engine overcoming drag. With these devices placed at crucial points like the trailer base, underbody and the space between the tractor and trailer, the drag is significantly reduced. The fuel savings amount to a reduction of 36 million tons of CO2 emissions a year -- the same as four 1-GW power plants -- and a cost savings of $10 billion a year for the U.S. trucking industry.
The LLNL's devices, along with other commercially-available ones, are being tested at NASA's Ames Research Center in the world's largest wind tunnel where researchers hope to coax even greater fuel efficiency through the large-scale testing. Trucks could be retrofitted with the devices in as little as three years.
via GreenBiz
Hits: 14213
Comments (12)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by michael stewart, February 20, 2010
the only trouble with all that skirting is it restricts airflow to the brakes.
brakes need to cool off.
brakes aren't used in a wind tunnel.
crosswinds are not used in a wind tunnel.
i'd like to have an ekg machine hooked up to one of the testers while in a big truck descending a long grade with hot brakes.
if any of these 'scientists' ever drove a truck in a gusting crosswind on slippery roads for a few hundred miles, they would rethink their premises just a bit.
as long as lawyers and lobbyists in washington fashion and make truck configuration laws nothing is ever going to improve.
brakes need to cool off.
brakes aren't used in a wind tunnel.
crosswinds are not used in a wind tunnel.
i'd like to have an ekg machine hooked up to one of the testers while in a big truck descending a long grade with hot brakes.
if any of these 'scientists' ever drove a truck in a gusting crosswind on slippery roads for a few hundred miles, they would rethink their premises just a bit.
as long as lawyers and lobbyists in washington fashion and make truck configuration laws nothing is ever going to improve.
-
- -2
-
-
written by darius, February 20, 2010
All great and all. I'm all for efficiency and energy use reduction but why the hell are they just doing things like this now? Its 2010. Shouldn't efficiency be high on the list for decade's now? Its been a high priority in Europe for a long time now. We really need much higher gas prices to 'force' this on the consumers and have them demand that from the companies. Our prices of gas are way too low. Its the sort of attitude that really gates to me. Gas price is low screw efficiency ...
-
- +3
-
-
written by bill, February 20, 2010
Nasa Ames has been testing big rigs in their wind tunnels to reduce air drag for at least 20 years.
-
- +0
-
-
written by mike, February 21, 2010
'only trouble with all that skirting is it restricts airflow to the brakes'
it doesn't restrict airflow to the brakes. it reduces drag. air is still flowing over the brakes.
as for actual problems that are created - the skirts need to be flexible, as grade changes at driveways have popped a few off here in WA.
it doesn't restrict airflow to the brakes. it reduces drag. air is still flowing over the brakes.
as for actual problems that are created - the skirts need to be flexible, as grade changes at driveways have popped a few off here in WA.
-
- +2
-
-
written by Greg, February 21, 2010
Instead of aerodynamic skirting, a much bigger increase in fuel/cargo efficiency can be obtained by pulling two or more trailers with the prime mover. It works very well and is very stable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-Train
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-Train
-
- +1
-
-
written by Timetrvlr, February 21, 2010
by michael stewart:
.......the only trouble with all that skirting is it restricts airflow to the brakes.
brakes need to cool off.
...and on that cue, enter hybrid trucks with regenerative braking that recover braking energy as electricity and store it.
260 Ton mining trucks use dynamic braking as well as disk brakes to slow them down on steep 15 degree grades at slow speeds (no wind). Its about time for highway truck design to catch up on the technology front.
-
- +1
-
-
written by dictionar german, February 21, 2010
It is a clever idea with more so as it can be used in current conditions. I love NASA 
-
- +1
-
-
written by Steve, February 25, 2010
(I'm starting to see some trucks on the road with these types of devices.)
Regenerative braking, additional trailers and better aerodynamics are all great ideas whose time has come.
But freight trucking has little choice in this since at this point rail freight is much more energy efficient, at least if their TV commercials are to be believed. In the future you might see more products delivered long distance by train, with trucks more limited to shorter runs.
Is that why Warren Buffet is investing heavily in rail freight?
But, as somebody said above already, the thing that would really drive significant adoption of any such innovation would be to include even a small percentage of the environmental and national security costs related to oil into our fuel prices.
Forget carbon, what would a gallon of gas cost if we paid for our trillion dollar wars in oil-rich countries with a gas tax instead of money borrowed from the Chinese and future generations of taxpayers?
Regenerative braking, additional trailers and better aerodynamics are all great ideas whose time has come.
But freight trucking has little choice in this since at this point rail freight is much more energy efficient, at least if their TV commercials are to be believed. In the future you might see more products delivered long distance by train, with trucks more limited to shorter runs.
Is that why Warren Buffet is investing heavily in rail freight?
But, as somebody said above already, the thing that would really drive significant adoption of any such innovation would be to include even a small percentage of the environmental and national security costs related to oil into our fuel prices.
Forget carbon, what would a gallon of gas cost if we paid for our trillion dollar wars in oil-rich countries with a gas tax instead of money borrowed from the Chinese and future generations of taxpayers?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ray-ray, February 25, 2010
When I firt found the ecomodder forum I had to laugh that peps were spending a lot of energy just to streamline there 35 mpg vehicles to get a two digit increase in mpg's while I was running on waste veg oil, not remembering the last time I saw a gas station. Saddly that car is gone now and I'm starting to look towards streamlining.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Andrew, February 26, 2010
All the improvements done to the front of the trucks is fine, but don't forget that the back of the truck is flat and it acts like a vacuum pump holding the truck back and using more fuel. Try this idea for size: When the truck is on the highway have an inflatable cone that extends out from the back of the truck or semi, reducing the vacuum effect that interferes with the truck fuel efficiency. At lower speeds, this cone would deflate and collapse when off the highways and freeways. Never saw it done, but I'm sure this would save lots of fuel and cruising speeds.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Mark Whittington, February 28, 2010
I agree with Michael Stewart. You have a lot of variables out there on an open road. All this information looks good in a lab enviroment but you have to consider the real world. There is nothing like smoking brakes when you are comming down Donner Pass and then falling off into Sacramento traffic.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Ideas and improvements that pay for themselves - it's **always** the way to go.
Now - about that little solar-powered Stirling hydrogen pump for all our houses .... Dean Kamen, I'm looking at you!