3. System Efficiency Theory
How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?
SUV weight = 2,000 KG
Rolling Resistance 15 kg/ton = 30 KG
Wheel Radius = 0.3 m
Necessary torque - 30 x 0.3 x 9.8 = 88 Nm
50 km/h - 50,000/60 = 833 m/min
50 km/h - 833m/(0.6m x 3.14) = 443 RPM

4. System Efficiency Theory Power = Torque (Nm) x Speed (RPM) / 9550
How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?
Power = Torque (Nm) x Speed (RPM) / 9550
Power needed to operate an 50km/hour
kW = 88 x / = 4.1 kW or 5.5 hp
Mechanical Requirement 4.1 kW or 5.5 hp
Auxiliaries and Air Resistance 1.2 kW or 1.6 hp
Total Power Consumption 5.3 kW or 7.2 hp
That is roughly the power of 4 coffee machines. .

5. System Efficiency Theory
How much energy or force is needed at a speed of 50 km/hour?
The specific fuel consumption of a motor is liter per kW
Specific means fuel in - power out, including efficiency of the motor.
The fuel consumption to operate an 50km/hour for one hour
Fuel Consumption = (liter/kW) x 5.3 kW= 1.45 liter
Theoretically such a car should have a fuel consumption of:
2.9 liter/100km or 34 km/liter

6. Reality Check – Theory versus Fact
Manufacturers’ specified Gearbox Efficiency: 95%
Fuel consumption should therefore be:
kWh / Efficiency x SFC for 100 km = 5.3 / x x 2 =
3.06 liter/100 km or 32.7 km/liter
In reality fuel consumption of this 50km/hour is about:
8.5 liter/100km or 11.1 km/liter
Actual Gearbox 50 km/h:
(3.06 x 0.95) / 8.5 x 100 = 34%

7. e-Traction® System Performance TNO Road-tests
e-Traction® System Performance TNO Road-tests* confirm Whisper's energy consumption
liters/100 km
km per liter
e-Traction® System
City
15.0
6.7
Highway
12.8
7.8
Classic technology
45.0
2.2
33.0
3.3
* Since March 2005 in simulated passenger service.

8. e-Traction® System Innovations
Emission reduction: a function of reduced energy consumption,
the e-Mission™ Particle Eliminator and a silent APU
Pollution control
Computerized
Energy Mgt.
Batteries
APU (generator)
Traction System

9. Annual CO2 Emission Reduction e-Traction® powered Whisper™ Bus
Emissions are to a large extend a function of fuel consumption, thus
Annual Fuel Savings: (annual mileage ÷ current km/l) - (annual mileage ÷ Whisper™ km/l)
for example: (90,000 km ÷ 2 km/l) - (90,000 ÷ 6) = 30,000 liters per year
Annual CO2 emission kg per liter of diesel
79.4 metric tons per year

10. Particle Reduction of e-Traction® powered Bus
(with 66.7% reduction in fuel-consumption and e-Mission™ Particle Eliminator*)
Roof-mounted container with cyclones, muffler and electronic controls
Receptacles collect carbon deposits that only need
to be emptied periodically
The Whisper produces only (100% %) * 0.8 = 6.7% of the PM2.5 particles of an average Dutch city bus.
* Currently in testing – already achieving a greater than 80% reduction

11. Ecologic & Economic Benefits rarely ever seen to go hand in hand!
In conclusion; the e-Traction® System:
reduces harmful air and noise pollution,
90% reduction of soot pollution and noise reduction from 78 to 62 dBa
reduces the need to import energy
At least 50% reduction in fuel consumption ( 158 million liters per year)
lowers the cost of mobility.
Breakeven point of initial investment is 3 years.

12. The primary Source of Energy Conservation
TheWheel™: an Electric Direct Drive Wheel-hub Traction-system
The primary Source of Energy Conservation
90+% of the energy used actually reaches the contact patch with the road
Tire
Rim
The only moving part!
VDC Energy Input
∆ 90+%
Energy Contact Patch

13. e-Traction® Direct-Drive Product Range
e-Traction®SM350/1, TheWheel™ SM500/1, SM500/2 and SM700/3

14. e-Traction® Low Floor Rear Axle Compatible with commonly used designs
90 cm wide aisle, 50 cm above 15 cm ground clearance

15. Light weight composite e-Traction® Bus
Fuel consumption certified by TNO

16. 3 different groups can be identified.
How decides if this revolution is going to work.
Lets have a closer look at the stakeholders in the chain of those how will benefit from innovations.
3 different groups can be identified.

17. Group number 1 High Priority
How decides if this revolution is going to work.
Group number 1
High Priority
A: Inhabitants of cities and bus users.
B: Local Governments
C: Regional Governments / Central Government
Cleaner air.
Less noise.
Lower cost of heath care.
Lower cost of transportation.

18. Group number 2 No high Priority
How decides if this revolution is going to work.
Group number 2
No high Priority
A: Bus operators
B: Bus builders
Risk of innovation.
No back up from the authorities.
No incentive because rule are not necessary to fulfill.
Afraid of cost increase in service and maintenance.
Strong demand in reliability from authorities
no guarantee that they can keep fuel reduction.

19. Group number 3 No Priority at all
How decides if this revolution is going to work.
Group number 3
No Priority at all
A: Chassis manufacturing.
B: Suppliers of classic technology (motor/gearboxes).
C: Producer of Hardware like bolts en nuts .
Risk of innovation.
No connection with the authorities.
Production cost will be higher.
Strong demand in reliability from bus builder and operators.
Do not benefit from fuel and maintenance reduction.
Have to school new generation of service and maintenance personnel.

20. Group number 1 decides if this revolution is going to work.
High Priority
A: Inhabitants of cities and bus users.
Clean air
less noise
Healthier cities
B: Local / Regional Governments
Lower cost of transportation
C: Central Government
Lower costs of healthcare
Complying to Kyoto rules
Complying to EU regulations