SAE Government/Industry Meeting - Jan. 2010

Every now and then I read about something that 'tickles' my paranoia and this one struck it soundly:

January 26-29, 2010
Walter E. Washington Convention Center
Washington, DC USA
in conjunction with The Washington Auto Show
​

The reason I bring this up is the confluence of 'the usual suspects' and some of the technical subjects (my paranoia in italics):

• Adding Up the Carbon of Renewable Fuels - getting off of the fossil fuel treadmill
• Alternative Fuel Vehicle Safety - threat or hazard?
• Child Safety - important for back-over accident avoidance
• Electricity -- The Fuel of the Future ... Today? - trying to keep the EV1 in the grave
• Pedestrian Safety - "Bell the Hybrid"
• Return of the Plug-in Electric Vehicle -- Will the Sequel Succeed? - keeping the prequel dead
• Safety Data - Ok, this one appeals to my inner geek ... data
• Second Generation Biofuels - sounds like a good review of future fuels
• Who Pays for the High-Fuel Economy Vehicles of the Future? - the return of CNW Marketing(?)

The subject matter directly or indirectly affects us. If I still lived in the DC area, I would be there to get the facts and data as well as meet some of these folks. But the bottom line is it costs ~$500 for the fee and lasts four days in Washington DC (pretty expensive place.) The only cost mitigation is it isn't tourist season.

The challenge is deciding if this is something others would like to support to send a "Prius or Hybrid Owner's Representative." I would be willing to cover the conference fee but I'm not able to cover the transportation and living expense. But I may be alone in thinking this is something that needs coverage.

Comments?

FYI, I'm pretty sure the "Bell the Hybrid" legislation will kick off in January. The recent quiet has been just trying to keep their 'powder dry.' It is more likely that committee hearings and a vote is planned to be concurrent with this conference.

Bob Wilson

 

I have long suspected that Art was just a front for someone else. His Oregon based, marketing firm is not going to have the factory and production data he presented in his report. Also the collection vehicle lifetime miles is another data point that is not going to be in his ready data sources. His company does not have the depth to have this data. No, I think his sources are still buried within the big three or their hired 'think tank.'

What really caught my attention was communication with David Cole of the Center for Automotive Research. When I asked him about some of the dubious claims by CNW Marketing, David Cole defended the man and then I started looking closer at the research studies published by Center for Automotive Research. The types of data in the Center for Automotive Research published papers is exactly the type that seemed to have shown up in a "Dust to Dust." Off hand, I suspect an 'unpublished' report might have been shared with a willing 'front man' and the echos still reverberate today. But I'm a little leery of SAE since many of the members and supporting companies have 'skin in the game' for gas-only vehicles.

What brought my suspicions of the SAE home was a paper "An Analytic Foundation for the Two-Mode Hybrid-Electric Prowertrain with a Comparison to the Single-Mode Toyota Prius THS-II Powertrain" by Jerome Meisel, Georgia Institute of Technology (2009-01-1321.) I soon realized there were some fundamental mistakes in his model. For example, "Fig. 11 Power levels in the THS-II with ... 1500 rpm (ICE) and V=80 mph"

56.23 kW - output of MG2
40.63 kW - input to MG1
. . . this is a remarkable feat since it exceeds the capacity of MG1 and saturates MG2 . . .
34.53 kW - output of ICE
18.92 kW - shaft power to wheels
​

Now one marginal paper is not enough to call into question a whole organization but this paper was supposed to have been peer reviewed. Then there was another problem with the P&G paper, 2009-01-1322. My impression is SAE does not quality check those that deal with hybrid technology very well. Occum's razor suggests ignorance more than malice but the effects are often similar.

The reason for having one or more, knowledgeable representatives attending the conference is to 'ask questions.' So when someone presents a paper with questionable numbers, question them. Equally important is to have the backup data and 'press packages.' The goal is to make sure questionable papers don't receive a 'free pass' in the press.

Bob Wilson