Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Xoon

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    548
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Xoon last won the day on March 26

Xoon had the most liked content!

About Xoon

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,308 profile views
  1. I am curious, what would be needed to penetrate the Norman at 1-2Km range? Speaking about both HEAT and KE. Would a 120mm be sufficent? Or would a 150mm be needed?
  2. I am just joking. I am guessing the practical limit is 40 ton, since more than 4 axles are rare on AFVs. @Sturgeon I am going to laugh my ass off if this ends up being the winning submisson, just replace the crane with a cannon.
  3. Thank you, this cleared up a lot of things for me. I have been looking into torque vectoring transmissions and differential steering for electric and hybrid transmissions. I saw the transmission made by University of Munich: Here is another one from Borg Warner: Call me a idiot or something, but I can't for the love of god understand these. It can't be as simple as using a electric motor and a clutch to apply additional power to one of the two wheels right? I have also been pondering about the efficiency of several transmissions, and I honestly came to the conclusion from rough estimates that a dual motor setup is the most optimal. Let's consider a few layouts: -Single motor with a differential. -Independent motor setup. - Double differential with electric motors. In a single motor setup with a transmission, one would think one motor would be more efficient right? Well, actually no, as seen in many hyper efficiency EVs. Let's have a few basis numbers: Electric motor(M): 95% Motor controller(C): 95% Differential(D): 93% Reduction gear(R): 95% Power(P): 100Kw Single motor with differential: Efficiency = (P*C*M*R*D) 79,93% = (100*0,95*0,95*0,95*0,93) Total system efficiency is 79,93%. Capable of basic torque vectoring with braking, greatly hurting the overall efficiency. Independent motor setup: Efficiency = ((P/2)*C*M*R)*2 85,74% = ((100/2)*0,95*0,95*0,95)*2 Total system efficiency is 85,74%. Honestly, considering the complicated gearing, gearing of the double differential system with electric motors, I doubt it would come close to either above, so I will do any rough calculations. A independent motor setup also beats out a average transmission by 10 percentage points. (85% vs 75%). Factoring in the generator and rectifier (0,95 for generator and 0,95 for active rectifier) it still leads by 5% points (80% vs 75%). This might not seem like a big deal, but this is essentially 75hp in a 1500hp system. And this does not even start to factor in regeneration, which in EV's extend their range by up to 30%, and should be just as effective in a tank that frequently sprints and stops. Not to mention the fuel saved by running the engine at a constant RPM, harvesting excess power from the turbocharger, and being able to automatically turn the engine on and off to save fuel while on standby, and the increased initial acceleration. One could also saved weight, as there is no need for a starter, alternator or flywheel. The internal generator could even be used to external equipment or high power equipment like a ETC gun. 1100Kw is a lot of power to have on standby. Other advantages of the independent motor setup, hereby IMS, is the ability to "reverse" the transmission. You can literally drive the same speed in forward as in reverse, and you could reuse a MBT chassis as a IFV chassis by turning it around, vice versa. The motor can also be used for negative torque vectoring, recovering power when doing tighter brake turns. They can also produce peak power 3+ times their continues rating. That means a 1000hp AFV would be able to do short sprints at 3000hp! It has been noted that it would not be able to transfer torque between the motors, but when does a AFV actually need to apply more than 50% power on one track? As far as I have seen, it is a rare occurrence. Another issue some say would be that the motors would rotate at different speeds. This would be very easy to rectify. Simply use the motor controllers current readings (Sinus curve corresponds to the position of the rotor magnets in relation to the poles on the motor) to track the motor's rotor position and estimate the speed from that , or at a rotary encoder for a simply speedometer.
  4. Could anyone with a good understand of gearboxes explain how this steering differential works? As far as I understand, the drive input powers the system, and when the steering differential's RPM equals zero, the torque is distributed equally. When the steering input rotates clockwise, the right side drive gets the most torque, proportional to the steering input torque. When the steering input rotates counter clockwise, the left side drive gets the most torque, proportional to the steering input torque. When the drive input is put in neutral, the steering input can be used to pivot on the spot. When doing this, the steering input directly powers the side drives. The one thing I get is, how does the steering input control the torque of the drive side? Is it by the epicyclic gear? Why does it not transfer the torque back into the steering input and grind against the other epicyclic gear, or fight the steering input?
  5. If you are going to splice some wires, for the love of god, unless you are good at soldering, use a solder sleeve. And ALWAYS use heat shrink to protect it, worst case, use wulk tape to cover it.
  6. Does states not have their own welfare programs? Also, guess what 50% of Norway's export is, and what we have shit loads of around Svalbard and the arctics. I am not sure what the health care service in the US is, but Norway's healthcare is "adequate", or a bit worse.
  7. Go ahead, you guys would still probably tax me less than the Norwegian government. I would not mind a tax break.
  8. The Danes plan to make Greenland a independent nation, meaning it would be a political catastrophe to propose selling it to the US. However, the US might leverage making Greenland a territory or state, which would be a good offer to Greenland, who would not be able to leverage any political power on the world stage, has zero money for defense and is already defended by the US. Access to the US market without tariffs would also be a huge plus for the Greenland economy. Personally, I think Norway should be given Greenland, as it was taken by Denmark from Norway by force. If the US gets Greenland, it would be pretty much the village bicycle of the Atlantic, being passed around from state to state.
  9. I have a few questions regarding US gun laws: Do US firearms come with a identification number that is registered to an owner, that the police can search up in a database? In that case, could police then do random check ups on people's firearms to check if the firearm has been stolen? In the case the registration number is gone, or scratched up, the police could confiscate the firearm, until the owner gets a new registration plate or re-registers the gun. This way, the US would know how many guns each person owns, and how many in total in the US. A national fire arms register could be established, which could be checked with medical and police records of the owner and the house hold. If the police see a mentally ill person stockpiling weapons commonly used by mass shooters, they could put them on a watch list. And what about a incentive for people to buy less "assault weapons" with either a tax on the more lethal weapons, or a discount on the more personal defense oriented firearms. Let's say all small compact pistols with equal or less than 15 rounds in the magazine gets a 15% discount. Or all hunting rifles that can contain more than 5 rounds have a 10% tax. The idea would to instead of banning all sorts of useless things, we could incentivies people to buy less lethal and more practical weapons. Enthusiasts could still own their AR-15 with 200 round drum mag, with a bumpstock and night vision scope, while the average bloke would probably own a cheap and compact pistol for concealed carry in self defense.
  10. So what is the deal with the US wanting to buy Greenland again? Is it to claim more of the arctic continental shelf? To box in Canada? To protect the northern atlantic sea route from invasoin? Is it because of the raw resources found in Greenland with the ice going away? To use Hans Island as a pretext to invade Canada? Or do Trump just want some ice for his beer? If we say that the Danes would sell Greenland to the US or the Greenland goverment voted to join the US, would it become a state or a terretory like Puerto Rico? Source: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/3JXB59/trump-bekrefter-groenland-interesse-det-er-en-stor-investering?utm_source=vgfront&utm_content=row-1
×
×
  • Create New...