Introduced at ConExpo today. Looks interesting. Deere Developing Huge Hybrid Loader Deere & Co. At CONEXPO-CON/AGG 2011 tomorrow, John Deere will give the world a glimpse of the diesel/electric hybrid 944K wheel loader the company is working carefully to bring to market. "In addition to fewer emissions, customers asked for durability, fuel efficiency and reduced tire wear," said John Chesterman, product marketing manager for four-wheel-drive loaders with John Deere. "We've responded with a loader that incorporates four modular, independent wheel drives with electronic traction control." The 9-cubic-yard loader will use electric traction, meaning the engine drives a generator to create electricity used by an electric motor to drive each wheel. Sophisticated, responsive traction control should not only provide excellent terrain ability, but it significantly improve fuel efficiency, reduce tire wear, and increase drive-train durability and reliability by doing the work with fewer moving parts. Customers also asked that the 944K give them better bucket-dumping visibility, so Deere's product development team is working with them to include a traditional dual-arm boom design. But the company is not rushing this engineering departure to market. "We won't rest until this nine-yard production-sized loader addresses customer requirements for maximum productivity and uptime, and lower daily operating costs," said Chesterman. "We are targeting 2013 for launch."
Wow, way to be on the cutting edge of technology there John Deere. Yeah, don't rush it into production either. An Engineering Departure?? LeTourneau has had this in production for over 50 years and they build the world's biggest rubber tire loader at about 54 cubic yards in the L2350, if not bigger by now. They own the market in their class. I cannot recall a competitor to them, but I am not a mining person. Whew, Deere you're really sneaking up on everybody! LoaderMonkey, I'm not coming down on you. It's these overeducated marketing managers that spew this crap that irritates me. But then again, I yell at my network news program too. Facts are beside the point anymore. "We won't rest..." Yeah, I bet he forgoes his vacation for the project. What a load of B/S. You couldn't beat a half a day's work out of him with a wet lariat rope. Where do they get these idiots...
So what exactly is your issue with the 944 and Deere on this? Yes this is a departure for JD.... for them. Have you seen an Electric Hybrid drive loader from them that I haven't before? For them the 9yd loader class is all new territory. As is the Hybrid Drive system. Comparing any LeTourneau loader to any JD loader is like comparing my flame thrower to your bic. They are intended for 2 different worlds. The marketing crap they are spewing out, is pretty dead on for them. They haven't tinkered in the E-Drive class before, except for the 944 and 644K loaders. They have never been in the 9yd class before and why would they rush it into production? Why not let it simmer for a bit, hammer out the little problems you're bound to find in a new machine before it hits the market. I'm sure they could ram it down your throat right now but what happens when someone has the first batch of problems? It will have a bad name for as long as they decide to build it. I say they have it right, they are listening to customers and bringing out what people want.
I think it looks pretty promising too. The proof will be in the quarry. 20-25% better fuel economy is looking better and better these days.
This technology already exists, G.E. and Siemens (probably others) have incorporated this technology into Locomotives and off-highway haul trucks. The technology is very expensive, the traction alternator produces A/C, then it is rectified over to DC, then turned back over to a modified A/C with phase modules. It will be interesting with more manufactures looking into this technology to see how far it will advance.
My problem with Deere is that they act like it's new technology that they're just now discovering, and my reference between LeTourneau and Deere loaders wasn't meant to be apples to apples on the size of the loaders. It was a reference to the age of diesel electric drive technology used on wheel loaders. LeTourneau didn't start with a 54 cu yd loader either, they just started using this technology over 50 years ago . When I said LeTourneau had a 54 yard loader, it meant that if Deere was carefully pondering whether this new technology would work on a HUGE HYBRID LOADER (the headline in the press release above) in the 9 yard class, then I could guarantee them out loud on this forum that it would cause LeT's loader is my definition of a huge hybrid loader. I could have referred to Cat's new diesel electric drive dozer, but it has a different application than a wheel loader. The same goes for LeT's diesel electric drive scrapers from the past, and from that past I mean 70+ years ago cause if I remember right, RG came out with this application in the 1930's or 1940's before he applied it to wheel loaders. I'm not saying LeT invented the technology either, he just applied it to wheel loaders a long, long time ago. I don't have a problem with them not rushing a new diesel electric drive loader to market either, but I have my opinion at the propaganda they put out about it and I aired it. I hope they overtake the market with it and make billions off it since they're an American manufactureer employing American people. If it had've been Cat or Case to spew this crap, I would've said the same thing. As far as listening to their customers and bringing what they want to them, I guess the speed of sound is different there than it is here...
Even thoe i am a deereman I am all for someone else coming up with something good. Its funny how you say deere's propaganda but everyone does stuff like this but deere seems to have a very good team of doing this. It seems like every time cat comes out with something new everyone thinks its the best right off the line(etc skid steers and mini's)NOT.. And no its not new tech, but it is evolving. Remember how only a few ppl could afford cars and tv's way back then and how big and ockward they were?? Times have changed and the way things are built and being built are totally different. "As far as listening to their customers and bringing what they want to them, I guess the speed of sound is different there than it is here..." Whats your point here?? To add. Deere didn't just jump into this or think about this this year or last. This has been going on over 4 to 5 years. And not by themselves.. Deere has done this time and time again. If you want to get into a market go find a company that makes something good and improve upon it. Yea bell,hitachi, new holland, liebherr and a few others get alot of credit but Deere is doing its fair if not more share in making those products better.
Some people just don't like progress it seems.
From the original post: I bet that customers were asking for these same things 50 years ago. That's what I mean by the speed of sound. I don't see where you're getting that I'm against Deere or progress. Here, I'll offend some other people so you'll feel better. "The Cat 3208 engine was one of Cat's biggest failures as far as I'm concerned, and all of them should have been recalled and replaced along with a written apology from their engineering department." "The entire line of Terex dozers with their cutting edge technologically advanced radiator-in-the-back-to-cook-the-operator were pieces of crap with a wood grained dash built by a car company." I said it's the marketing that irritated me. The press release reads like they've invented an anti-gravity machine.
Now you've gone and said it with that last sentance!!lol Now stuff will be floating everywhere in just a few..Some times you just have to read that propagand stuff no matter who it is like its the daily news. same ol stuff different day. And now that deere is in this game it makes others more honest and for better products to come all the way around.
Over the last 40 plus years I have had the opportunity to run a lot of different equipment and the John Deere line of equipment has always impressed me the most when I got to try the next new model.It seemed like they had consulted with the operators before they made the changes to improve whatever it might have been that they changed. I have also wondered who they may have talked to,if anybody,when they designed their equipment (as a package) to have to repair or maintain.I guess you can't have everything but they seem to be very difficult to work on,there is just no room to work. I swear that the older dozers were built around the air cleaner.LOL Ron G
I actually saw this machine out an conexpo and it is pretty neat, didn't get to look real close, i was only out there for a couple of days so didn't feel like waiting in line for 20 mins to look at something. It is a big machine just as big as the 988 and wa600 a couple of booths away. it looks well built and if they r waiting till 2013 for the official launch that probably isn't a bad thing
Yea ron, those 450c were kinda llike sitting in a cockpit of an air plane. Pulling the levers stright back into your chest. I felt like i was in some messed up workout video..
I agree but they would work like no other!!You could catch a load on the corner of the blade and they would just keep on pushing straight and you could load that blade right up and it would keep on pushing,material rolling right over the top of the blade if you let it.What a hot rod.That John Deere line of small dozers would spoil you for any other.........side hill,no problem,those dozers would taunt you........ask me something I cannot do.....c'mon......try me!!!Ron G
With a 2013 launch scheduled, they kinda had to bring it out last week. Next CONEXPO is 2014. I know I'd want to show the thing to a CONEXPO crowd before I opened the order book. The size of this application is definitely a factor. The diesel/electric 644K they showed crossed the profit-margin line into single-electric-motor range, so they're building it with a conventional driveline broken by a generator on back of the engine and a motor on the transmission input shaft. The economics of building a 9-yard loader with four electric motors must have presented some real challenges. But the opportunities are pretty amazing. When I interviewed John Chesterman , product manager quoted in this thread's original post, he said they were expecting 25% to 30% fuel economy advantage for the 944K (20% to 25% for the more-conventional drive train in the 644K). I say Deere is a lot like Cat in that, assured of a fuel-economy advantage as convincing-sounding as 25% or 30%, why risk overpromising? It's early, they don't really know how much fuel it could save in the many varied applications and operators. Some very early users of the Cat D7E just laughed when I asked them if they got the 30% fuel economy advantage Cat was promising. "More like 50%" they said, not batting an eye. Then consider the tire-cost savings potential. Four independently monitored and controlled electric motors? Those tires are never going to slip. You put that kind of fuel- and tire-saving potential on the loading face, and I'll bet this machine will cut many quarries' ownership and operating costs in half. LeTourneau has made some amazing contributions to ultra-class mining equipment, and I have a great deal of respect for the company and for RG himself. I also have a lot of respect for Deere marketing this technology to a much broader market. The prior existance of diesel-electric propulsion hardly makes this application a "lay-up." Photos of the 944K at CONEXPO Larry
I agree with CEWriter on this one. I see the potential for Deere to cut a nice little hole in 988 sales with this machine when the time is right and they have the technology at a point where its going to be ready to bring to the market. John was kind enough to give us a walk around of the machine on video and we'll have that up in a couple days for you guys.
"Houston, we have a problem..." So you think Deere will price these loaders at the same level as conventional drive loaders in the same class effectively "giving" the new owners all of that 50% savings in ownership costs? Or, is it going to cost twice as much as conventional drives and save the owners 50% in fuel and tire costs? Operating costs includes maintenance and repair (including downtime for warranty work) as well and we don't know how this new technology's gonna hold up yet. They'll have to recover their R&D costs for this new technology somehow. I'd say they'll make it up on repair and replacement parts' costs down the road, as well as initial purchase price. Saying that it will cut ownership costs in half is a big stretch without production machines in operation reminding me of the problem I have with the marketing hoopla. I'd like to see the payout numbers on it after 10,000 hours and then again at 20,000 hours. I am sure it will definitely lower operating costs because Deere's no fool when it comes to designing and producing equipment, but I'll go out on a limb and say that it will never come close to reducing ownership costs by anything near 50%. It's a good looking machine from the pictures. I like the looks of the cab, maybe they were going for some of that retro cool look like the new Camaros or Mustangs with the windshield. It reminds me of the Cat loaders from the 70's which are my favorite looking models. I bet the inside of it is way nicer than those were though.
No. I'd expect electric drive to be significantly more expensive than conventional, made up largely by the low-volume cost of the motors, and partly by Deere taking a larger margin to recoup its development cost. Seems fairly unlikely that it will cost twice as much as conventional, because I'm sure Deere plans to actually sell some of them. It is indeed a stretch to say the 944K could cut ownership costs in half if you're talking about an average of all operations and you're measuring it in terms of dollars per hour. In saying 'many quarries' O&O costs' I was specifically thinking of those with high tire and driveline repair costs. Not only is the 944K likely to completely remake their tire costs, but electric drive is also likely to survive rough handling better than conventional drivelines over time. Together, I think those changes are likely to cut the operating side of the equation enough to bring total O&O down into the neighborhood of half those operations' previous expectations. Particularly if they are measuring costs in dollars per ton of material moved, rather than dollars per hour. Because a machine that operates under full power without spinning tires (or only slipping marginally) is filling buckets faster; its not down as much for driveline repairs; and as long as the electrical technology is durable, it seems reasonable to assume it's going to produce a longer, more-productive life. So yeah, if one of the many quarries that has trouble with tire and driveline life can reliably measure costs in terms of dollars per ton now buys a 944K, I would not be surprised if it delivers in the neighborhood of half the O&O costs. Shall we debate the size of the neighborhood?
You're going to have to pass the Durability exit before you get to the neighborhood, cause those little numbers pave the street to the bottom line, no matter if you measure in tons or hours. Deere's marketing said it would be durable because customers demanded it, don't you believe them? There's that marketing again. If it's not durable, there go the O&O costs. John Chesterman is a Product Manager. His job is to sell you something, good or bad . I bet he can't make it last any longer by telling you how good it is. Nope, I'm sure of it. The jury's still out on this one. I want to see some payout numbers to convince me, Joe Dirt, to part with my money, not somebody selling a perpetual motion machine.
I encounter equipment buyers all the time who figure that if the Deere or Cat rep tells them a machine is going to last, they pretty much count on it. Of course they may write an uptime guarantee into a purchase contract -- and a manufacturer who has confidence in their product will be willing to sign that document -- but the basic thinking is that a liar doesn't last very long in the business selling million-dollar machines. If anything said in the sales process, or "marketing," is to be considered a lie, then it seems to me there would be an awful lot of ruined hulks of business-wrecking Deere (and Cat and Komatsu and Case and . . . ) equipment strewn across the landscape. I mean, when you consider the number of units rolling off those manufacturers' assembly lines. 'Cause every one of them comes with the marketing peoples' hearty assurance that those machines will deliver a reasonably profitable operating life. Certainly no intelligent businessman would buy a second machine from a company that couldn't deliver decent value for price of their machines and parts? Yet I meet contractors all the time who have tens, hundreds, even thousands of Cat or Deere or Komatsu or Case machines in their fleets. They must not be as shrewd as you are. Must be awful lucky, though. Many of them have been in business 30 or 40 years or more.
Thanks for the photos. I appreciate them. Regardless of technology, it is refreshing to see someone shaking up this market. It improves the competition in the long run and makes the products better. In the end, the equipment users benefit.
Of course there are those in the market that are an easy sale and want to try new products immediately. They want to be the first ones on the block to have it or they have an immediate need for it and trust the manufacturer explicitly. These people are the ones most influenced by marketing. Some manufacturers have used them as an extension of their R&D departments in product testing. LeTourneau is the first one to pop into my mind with some of their crazy creations when R.G. was at the helm. I'm not in this group. The salesman for the worst loader manufacturer that you can think of probably didn't lie to his customers either. He thought that they were good value. He must not have been qualified to judge though because his machine is the worst in the market remember? I move dirt from Point A to Point B. Even though I'm not a World Traveler, I can still make an informed decision on a purchase. I see that you are involved in a construction magazine and I'm guessing that as an advertiser Deere spends millions of dollars each year in magazines such as yours. I think that we'll all agree that their are some products such as loaders, dozers, and excavators in the market that are junk. I'm just trying to remember the last article I read that was written about them...not that you have a vested interest or anything.
Let's keep this topic alive. I promised the video and we've made it happen. As I said I think this is a great product and John Deere usually does a great job of thinking the product through. Jumping in the new products at the show you can tell they are listening to people. I can think of some other manufacturers that aren't doing such a hot job at that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQY4ehsvKB0
Guys... the 944K isn't necessarily a direct competitor to the 988 or WA600 or L350. Both Deere and Volvo are seeing a need for a size class slated just about the 7.5 yd class but below the 10 yd class -- and this is also where the L250G fits in. I think the 944K will compete in a bank loader market that requires machines more powerful than the 7.5 yd class but that isn't as large or as production-oriented as the 10 yd class, but of course we'll see how it turns out in its final form. I think there will be challenges in bringing a diesel-electric drive to a wheel loader in this size class, but I think the D7E stole the 944K's thunder. Had the 944K been the first diesel-electric machine to be unveiled, it'd be heralded as the pioneer; as the D7E has come out, I think it grabbed the major headlines first, even if the magnitude of the engineering challenge is the same or greater for the 944K. Burnout, don't be deceived: just because Deere is making a big deal about its efforts to get owners' opinions does not mean other manufacturers are not listening. I applaud Deere for what they're doing -- brand image is worth a lot in today's market, and they are very clear about how they want to differentiate their image -- but no engineering department is so isolated that it doesn't bring in customers to hear their stories. Execution of realizing end users' opinions... that's another story entirely.
I like to think Deere is listening because of some key features I am seeing come down the lines. I know what your saying and I know other companies are listening. But look at the new Deere G series hoes, the radio/hvac controls are on the right side console under the monitor. And they display on the main monitor. They have put the cup holders in the K series dozers within easy reach as well as the HVAC controls. The sealed panel in the wheel loaders has got better yet again, then there is that whole steering wheel in graders thing. I realize every company works on different aspect of the product line and yeah the 7E is gonna get the thunder over the 944. They are going to have some challenges especially stepping into a new size class but it seems to have worked for them with the 844.
There are some that adopt new technologies early and are on the forefront of looking for new ways to reduce their costs. There are those in the middle that neither adopt early nor wait until the technology is mature. Then there are those that are technology laggarts that resist new technology almost to the point that they don't change simply for the sake of "we have been doing it this way for years and it works." With that being said I have seen many companies across the world grasp the wonders of new innovations first and use these advantages as leverage against their competition. These companies are almost always the ones that have the largest growth and are the most profitable. Those that continue to buy old equipment and rebuild it time and time again, don't use any kind of grade control and only move dirt one way regardless of the conditions are usually the first ones to suffer the same fate as cable dozers and steam shovels...they simply aren't around anymore. The point of my rant is that no matter how good the 944K/D7E/etc etc are there will be people that will not buy them because "they will let others work out the bugs". Many people get all emotional about these types of decisions. The fact of the matter is that these are business decisions based upon calculated risks...that's it...nothing more and nothing less. There are many people out there that are being forced to do more with less with rising fuel, labor, insurance, etc costs. If electrification of powertrains can reduce their cost per ton by 10%, 20%, 30% it becomes less of a "gamble" and more of a calculated risk. There will no doubt be those that have a higher tolerance for risk than others. Like any business risk the pay off of that risk may be the difference in millions of dollars per year and the difference if a company continues to make payroll when the economy takes another turn downward. In my experience quarry operations will kill for a reduction in their cost per ton by a penny or two. One other factor that companies will take into consideration is the ability of the manufacturer and dealer to support these new machines. If the manufacturer and dealer have a proven track record of supporting machines then the risk of the new powertrain is futher reduced.
farm_boy, You're forgetting that it'll have a higher resale value too, what with all that copper in there. I heard that scrap copper's going for something like 3 bucks a pound.
d9gdon, why does it seem that you go after anything deere?? I hate cat and most everyone knows it but I try to keep my negatives to short unless asked.
I just can't get past the fact that this is old technology and most of the pioneer engineering work should be attributed to LeTourneau's classic wheel loader design, not Caterpillar's D7E dozer. A dozer has a totally different application. LeT's wheel loaders have the exact same application as this 944K; load, dump, and cycle. I'm saying this street is already paved for someone wanting to go down it. Surely it hasn't taken all the other manufacturers 50 years to see the benefits. Now that's the wait and see approach. It's easier to downsize proven technology than it is to upsize it, ceteris paribus . Caterpillar did almost the same thing with the new D7E by copying the Tournadozer concept. I fully expect one or both of them to come out with a 2 stroke diesel to put in one of their machines and yell from a mountaintop how it's a quantum leap in fuel efficiency.
Yeah, we've noticed....... If you really understood this, you'd see this is actually new technology applied to an old, proven concept. But until recently, the technology available didn't make the system feasible (either practically or economically) for a smaller application such as this. I'm guessing you've never worked in a mine with large loaders, the application is not exactly the same. When it comes down to it, all loaders have a pretty similar application when loading trucks, but there are definitely differences. The big key here, is that until recently, the technology just didn't match up to the application of electric drive to smaller machines....not that you'll listen. Not always the case. Modern techniques and materials have allowed the manufacturers to downsize and apply this technology to new applications like so many have mentioned. If you go back to the technology R.G. LeTourneau started with and developed, and tried to downsize it, then you'd find it just wouldn't work for this. So, you do realise that the Tournadozers were rubber tired, mechanical drive machines right? So as you stated, that's a different application....which makes it not really relevant here. I think what we keep seeing, is you confuse the terms technology and concept. This is new technology, but not a new concept. There is in fact a rather large difference between the two.
Alco, Im not good with my words on here, but you hit the nail on the head. D9g, I don't think deere is trying to still any thunder here. If anything saying its an honor. And as some of you already know, deere went stright to the horses mouth with this. Le'T nugged deere in the right direction if you know what I mean.. Deere is busting it's backside trying to get customers what they want and are really just now getting to explore new ideas and options. Not saying that the rest are sitting still. When I see komatsu or cat or whoever coming out with something and I see a little sweat rolling off of Deere I like it. That usually means they are about to (or already have) getting ready for round 2, 3 or 10. When deere bought a 30% or so stake in bell. They already knew the direction they were going. And the 460E is just the latest thing to come from that marriage.
http://www.elektroauto-aktuell.de/hybrid-4.html I guess like former President Bill Clinton, it depends on what your definition of "recent" is. It sounds like Ferdinand Porsche had it downsized recently too, according to the link above. By it , I mean a series based ICE-electric system like the 944K as opposed to a parallel type sytem or one like the 644K. LeTourneau built the Pacemaker TR-60 diesel electric truck in 1959 that used about the same size tires and wheels as the 944K from my interpretation of the pictures I've seen, so I'm guessing that the size of the electric wheel motors have not been the hindrance to this new technology. I don't see where the other components have held it up either. Computers have been controlling machine functions, generators are about the same size, batteries are not an issue, wiring and circuits about the same, etc., etc. The Lunar Rover Vehicle had this same technology, and it's a lot smaller than this loader we're talking about. Again, 40 years ago. Lots of stuff from the space program was adapted to consumer and industrial applications. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo_lrv.html I don't see anything new about this technology at all, looking at Volvo's unveiling at ConExpo 3 years ago. http://www.siteprepmag.com/Articles/Products/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000289910 ...and this article's dated from 2007, since the one above is a parallel type system. http://www.volvo.com/dealers/en-gb/vcegb/products/Innovations/concept_wheel_loader/introduction.htm Is Deere just rebranding this machine of Volvo's now like it does with Liebherr and Bell products? The ad only says that it's "working carefully to bring it to market". Maybe LeTourneau is actually designing and building them, and that's why Deere is working with them on it. You're right, I've never worked in a mine. I don't have to stick my head up a bull's *** to judge a steak either. That's why I qualified my statement with all other things being equal. I'm not sure you're listening. I've worked out of a few though. You're also right about ulta large loaders being different than this loader, but I think you see what I meant about them As far as the Tournadozer, yeah I knew it was rubber tired and mechanical drive at first. I thought it had morphed into diesel electric drive with Wabco for some reason, but I was wrong. It's the first time ever. I said it before and I'll say it again. I hope they overtake the market with it and make billions off it since they're an American manufactureer employing American people. Now there's you something to quote. There's still nothing new about it. It's like deja vu all over again, I said that in my first post.
It's amazing how some people won't pull their heads out of the sand. Like I said repeatedly, the concept is not new, no one here is disputing that. But you seems to think that because it's electric, it's all the same technology as it was 50 years ago. I won't argue with you, you obviously know all there is to know about this. I mean, it's like cars, they haven't had any new technology in over 100 years....they still use round tires and run off gasoline....so it has to be the same....right?
Actually no Brian it's not. VERY different technology I mean c'mon guy 100 yrs ago they didn't have cup holders. I believe your argument is invalid lol. As for Don, I think you need to realize the three people your trying to argue against here in this thread... have all seen the 944 in person. The concept is not new, the application in which Deere has decided to use it, is kinda new. Maybe if someone fires that picture into photoshop and makes it a 988E you'll simmer down a bit eh chief?
Nice video, Burnout. Tigerotor - The difference between parallel and series electric drives will, indeed, be wasted on a lot of people, and they'll be inclined to think of the 944K as a follower. Many who stand to make some money by significantly reducing the operating cost of a 9-yard loader will find the 944K plenty exciting, even if the D7E used an electric motor before it. Frankly, I don't think "first" has much to do with the 944K's significance on the market, other than it being the first drive system that is going to take a huge whack out of fuel, tire and drive train costs in big loaders. Well put Farm Boy. I know several of the contractors who are involved in Deere's customer groups, on the 944K and on other machines, and I get a pretty good indication from them that the risks of investing in new technologies from Deere are not that great. If you know of some "junk" machines and can make that accusation stick, let me know. In 20 years of watching this industry, I've heard of virtually no design or engineering failures -- some weaker than others, susceptible to breakdown in extreme conditions, but no failures that anybody was willing to talk about. Coincidentally, I don't write about failed contractors or quarries much, either. People learn better from and respond more positively to examples of things done right. Oh and by the way, the Volvo wheel loader prototype at CONEXPO in 2008 was a parallel electric drive system. Different technology. And while they say their development of that loader is ongoing, Volvo has grown pretty quiet about it. Perhaps the recession has slowed their R&D schedule a bit. L
I know it is off topic but burnout it must be getting busy there again sureway is advertising in local newspaper and suncor is here this week and ce writer I like the web page you must be living the dream.
does any one know if the 944k is going to be A/C or D/C drive?
Whats the difference between parallel and series electric drives? CEwriter, I'm scratching my head about what you mean by parallel and series drives? I have a literal concept of parallel and series--for example, with hydraulic motors, a series drive is where you take the oil coming out of a motor and put it into a second motor. Of course, this concept doesn't work the same with wheel drives where you are trying to control wheel slip and the like. Please explain! Thanks, Jon.
The volvo parallel has a electric engine in the powertrain. As simple as a electric engine connected between the converter and the gearbox. Everything else is as usual, when extra power is needed electricity is put into the electric motor, and whoula you got 100 more hp. When bracking the electric engine acts as a generator, charging the batteries and generating braking power too. Series solution u got a generator on the engine and electric motors on the wheels or other places in the driveline. You transfer all the power via cables. On road trucks there is a lot of paralell systems out there. Especialy in busses that axcelerate and brake all day long. Charge when braking and let it out when axcelerating.
Hi all, I have been reading this forum for a couple of years, and didn't have much of a reason to post until now. It always interesting to here all of your opinions. I wanted to second everything mktef just said and add some more information. From what I have heard and read from conexpo, both the 644K and 944K shown at conexpo are examples of "series electric vehicles" (i.e. all power is converted to electric at one point in the drive-train). These are just two different variants of the technology. Also, the term hybrid really should not be applied to these machines as they do not store electric energy (unlike a Toyota Prius which uses batteries). Just as an FYI most of the advantages of this type of drivetrain have been around for years in the form of hydrostats. The main difference is the controllability of electric and the very high torque at low speed available from an electric motor (which is what makes the d7e a very good dozer).
My understanding of "parallel" as a applied to diesel/electric drives is that it means a conventional drive train turned by an a electric motor, as was the case with the 644K that Deere showed at CONEXPO. From the transmission to the ground it transmits power the as a conventional drive train (although some components may be adapted to work with an electric motor), but there's an electric motor between the engine and the transmission. I understand "series" as MKTEF said: an electric motor behind the engine, transmit electrical power via cables to wheel motors. This is how the 944K is designed. I'm told the series systems offer efficiency advantages over parallel systems because you lose more energy in the shafts and such in a conventional drive line. That's why Deere is talking about 20% to 25% fuel efficiency improvement for the 644K, and 25% to 30% fuel efficiency improvement in the 944K. L
Just a post to clarify the terminology. Neither JD shown at ConExpo were "hybrids" since neither have an energy storage means. Similarly, the Cat D7E is not a hybrid. However, the Komatsu excavator is since it uses capacitors to store energy. So, the terms series or parallel hybrid do not apply to either of the JD models. With that said, a parallel hybrid like the Volvo WL can supply power from either the engine or from an "parallel" electric motor. The Toyota Prius is like this. The advantage is the most efficient way to get power from an engine crankshaft to the wheels is a straight gearbox (assuming constant speed). A "series" hybrid is like the Chevy Volt where the engine is connected to a generator only and the drive motor is powered either by the engine driven generator or the batteries or both. There is no mechanical connection between the engine crankshaft and the wheels. If either of the JD models had a battery or capacitor connected to the drive motor controller it would then be considered a series hybrid. That one JD model had a single electric motor pushing the transmission and axles and the other had a motor at each wheel is irrelevant on it being called either a series or parallel arrangement. I think the proper nomenclature of the LeTourneau style drive (which the JD fundamental architecture is identical) is "electric infinitely variable bi-directional transmission." Mr. Engineered is 100% correct in saying a hydrostatic transmission would have an identical function, with differences being in cost, reliability, performance, etc. I believe the proper nomenclature of such a system would be "hydrostatic infinitely variable bi-directional transmission."
Diesel/Electric drive is a hybrid drive according to my electric engineering buddy. Since he is building a hybrid FSAE car right now, i'd call him an expert. Batteries and regenerative braking are not a requirements for hybrid drive systems. 944K, 644K and D7E are all series hybrids because they have one power transfer system where as a prius can use mechanical or electric drive systems.
hvy 1ton is correct. I had always understood that to be a hybrid, there must be a means of storing the energy to be introduced later, but this is not so. A hybrid is simply defined as: "A hybrid vehicle is a vehicle that uses two or more distinct power sources to move the vehicle. The term most commonly refers to hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), which combine an internal combustion engine and one or more electric motors." as quoted from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle
I respectfully disagree based on my engineering degree and 20 years working in the industry. The only power sources on the JD loaders and Cat dozer are the diesel engine. 1 power source per machine, therefore not a hybrid. The Komatsu excavator and Volvo wheel loader have 2 power sources - the diesel engine and the capacitors and batteries and therefore are hybrids. alco, it's interesting you and I read that exact same Wikipedia entry and interpreted it differently. If you read further down in the article every single vehicle mentioned has 2 or more power sources. Specifically, the all the trains mentioned have batteries or capacitors and are not just diesels with electric drives. 2 great examples of hybrids mentioned are mopeds that have gas engines and pedals (the human is the 2nd power source) and the first steam ships that also had sails to push them along. I think that initial definition is not accurate, but the rest of the article seems to be spot on. I love Wikipedia, but it's truly a work in progress and not every section of it is accurate. Also, the JD engineers I talked to at the show (old workmates from a previous OEM) were calling it an "electric drive" machine and not a "hybrid." Similarly, the Cat engineers I've talked do not call the D7E a "hybrid." Both Komatsu and Volvo call their machines hybrids. FSAE car is the Formula SAE car that college students work on, correct?
Diesel fuel and electricity seem to be 2 power sources to me, but i'm out of my element here. Yeah, he is building one for his senior design project.
An electric motor or electric generator are no more of a power source than a hydraulic motor or hydraulic pump. They transform power from one type to another (electric, hydraulic, mechanical). A senior in college is no more an expert engineer than a guy why just graduated from the union hall training course is an expert operator. :drinkup Here's probably the simpliest explaination I can think of: 1) a bicycle with pedals and chain has a human power source and a mechanical drive train - not a hybrid. 2) a electric bicycle with no pedals but with a battery and motor driving the wheel has a electric power source and an electrical drive train - not a hybrid. 3) a bicycle with pedals and chain and a battery and an electic motor would be a parallel hybrid. 4) a bicycle with pedals driving a generator that charges a battery that drives an electric motor would be a series hybrid. So, the new JD and D7E are like #2 - not a hybrid. The Komatsu EX and Volvo WL are like #3 - a hybrid. The new Chevy Volt is like #4 - a hybrid.
Nicely done!
There are a few different ways to solar charge an electric bicycle but this is probably my favourite system; I can use one 48V panel through a custom regulator to go straight to a lithium ion battery or else I can use the same panel to charge a battery bank to store the energy and then use an inverter and the normal battery charger for the bike battery. I've made a short video to show how to do this and put it on youtube. You can also access it through my Solar Bike website - solarbike.com.au http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5j9VyuWNzU
Hate to dig up an old topic BUT, has anybody actually seen one of the 944K loaders on a job site? Reason i ask is i saw one on a lowboy the other day and wanted to research the specs. Well, i couldn't find this machine on JD's website, nothing. So.....I know 1 is out there in the world, any more?
I saw one at the factory a couple weeks ago, no word on when they are coming out yet. A salesperson said he expected it to be later this year. On a different note the new 1050k is coming out the next month or two.