Cambridge Passenger/Commercial Vehicle

Kinetic Energy Recovery System

 What is CPC-KERS?
 Advantages
◦ Over Hybrids
◦ Over Flybrids & Other Alternatives
 Benefits
◦ Vehicle
◦ Manufacturing
◦ Commercial
◦ Environmental
 How it works
 Uniqueness Can you do it in-house yourself?
 Licensing & Partners
 The Cambridge Passenger/Commercial Vehicle Kinetic Energy
Recovery System is a patented mechanical regenerative braking
system that fits between the driveshaft and road wheel of a car,
truck or other wheeled vehicle.
 Very simple design – a simple differential gear system distributes
torque between engine, flywheel, and road wheel- easy to
manufacture with standard transmission components – much
cheaper than any existing design. It is of similar complexity to
existing hybrid power split devices (without the generators,
motors & batteries).
 Retrofit on existing designs. Fits into the wheel hub – positioned
and looking like a drum brake
 Very efficient – differential system transmits nearly 100% of
vehicles kinetic energy to flywheel.
 Light & safe – flywheel needs only store enough kinetic energy
for one acceleration cycle.
 The flywheel technology and storage in CPC-KERS and Torotrak
designs are virtually identical - however
 Zytek, Flybrid, Torotrak and Xtrac all depend on a CVT
◦ This increases the cost of theirs system by a factor of two to three relative
to CPC-KERS. Torotrak systems also have a significant weight penalty
◦ CVTs are not particularly efficient. mainly due to the oil pump. Also, the
clamping forces required to prevent belt slip are very large. If the CVTs
employs a torque converter this further reduces efficiency.
◦ Many CVTs are also restricted on torque. Belts are typically limited to
<400Nm.
◦ CVTs are an order of magnitude less efficient than the non-friction
differential solution in CPC-KERS
 Results are
◦ x2-x3 higher peak power output from CPC-KERS
50%-70% lower unit manufacturing cost of CPC-KERS
◦ x2-x3 Longer service life/higher reliability of CPC-KERS units
◦ Higher regenerative efficiency of CPC-KERS units
 Hybrids require exotic and often imported materials for batteries
and motors: Resulting issues include: Environmental impact of
hybrid car battery, Raw materials shortage e.g. Dysprosium.
CPC-KETS uses the same materials currently used in the vehicles
differential gear with a steel or steel carbon fibre flywheel.

 Hybrids are relatively complex, heavy and costly limiting them to

high end vehicles. CPC-KETS systems have a higher power
density, lower unit cost (approx 30% of the unit cost) and are
significantly less complex.

 Because of the electrical generation, electrical storage and

electrical propulsion stages hybrids have significantly lower
efficiency than the CPC-KETS which disposes of these stages.
The CPC-KETS is of similar weight and efficiency to the planetary
gear set in the Prius Power Split Device without the electric
motor, generator and battery (but with a 5kg flywheel)
 The primary purpose is to recapture significant amounts of
energy normally wasted during braking etc. (regenerative
braking) This is a mechanism that reduces vehicle speed by
converting some of its kinetic or gravitational potential energy
into angular momentum and back. Storage is typically enough
for one acceleration to cruising speed.

 The peak power of the vehicle can be significantly increased

using the flywheel and high efficiency power transfer system,
which is not dependent on electric motor sizes or fluid coupling
limits. This results in a smaller gasoline or diesel engine sized
more for average usage rather than peak power usage.

 The flywheel may be used in stop –start urban traffic so that the
main motor does not have to run in heavy traffic. This depends
on flywheel size.
 Uses existing material and plant
 Very simple. Development cycle similar to
normal transmission components.
 Retrofit – can be fitted to existing models to
extend model life
 Stimulates new vehicle purchase during an
economic downturn as fuel costs and cost of
ownership reduced significantly by new CPC-
KERS models
 Gives a decided USP and competitive
advantage during recession. “Why buy a
thirsty slow non-regenerative vehicle when
the cheaper to run, more powerful CPC-KERS
models available”
 No new vehicle development needed.
 Better fuel mileage. Lower ownership costs.
 Reduced carbon footprint owing to
regeneration & smaller engines (in more
powerful vehicles.
 Lower emissions especially in urban cycle.
 Fewer environmentally unfriendly imported
exotic materials.
 No hard to recycle, poisonous waste products
from batteries.
 001 Drive Shaft. Attached to “motor” (typically via gearbox).
002 Ring Gear
005 Gear face of Ring Gear. Can be two co-axial gears allowing different sized side
gears.(301/302) to allow different distribution of torque, power and angular velocity of Axle shaft and flywheel.
201 Rotating Differential Case
202 Spider Gear (typically multiple units – single unit shown here for simplicity).
203 Flange (optional)
301 Side Gear (1)
302 Side Gear (2)
401 Axle shaft (attached to “wheel”)
501 Flywheel. Typically energy storage would be enough to accelerate the vehicle to cruising
speed.
502 Flywheel backplate. Locked to or geared to Side Gear (2). Gearing would serve to ensure that
there is adequate stored energy in 501 for a given rotational velocity of the axle shaft 401.
601 Rotation of drive shaft (can be either way). This is where the vehicle’s input energy is put into
the system.
605 Initially this causes rotation of differential case through the crown wheel 005
602-604 Drive shaft rotation is split between output (axle shaft 401) i.e. 604 and flywheel 603, through
the flywheel backplate 602 which my contain reduction or more commonly step-up gearing or may be a direct
drive.
701, 702 The same methods may be used to control torque/power distribution between the flywheel
and output (i.e. the ratio of power stored to used for tractive purposes) as is used in automobile differential units
and limited slip differential units. These methods can also be used to determine how much of the power comes
from the flywheel v.s. the main power supply.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Ring gear 002 is driven by the “motor” by the pinion wheel. If the side gear 302 locked relative to the differential
case all the torque is transferred through side gear 301 and transmitted to the “wheel” on shaft 401.

During braking or descent, torque from 401 can be transmitted through the differential case gearing system 201
to the large flywheel 501. The vehicle’s kinetic or gravitational potential energy is thus transferred to the kinetic
energy of the flywheel.

This energy is available to be returned through the differential case gearing system 201 from the large flywheel
501 to the wheel 401 again using – for example a friction brake to distribute torque.

The flywheel may be shape to encompass the rest of the system to allow the system to fit within a standard road
wheel like a drum brake. Alternatively the whole system may be mounted inboard on the halfshafts or main
driveshaft or anywhere on the transmission between the “wheels” and “motor”

The gear face may be placed on the inside or outside edge of the ring gear to allow the input shaft 001 to be
parallel or co-axial to the output shaft 401 with or without additional gearing.

CPC-KERS UK Patent 0813194.8

 It would be very natural for in-house auto and transmission
manufacturers to think
“But we’ve got brilliant” multi-million dollar, award winning designers
in–house so we don’t need to license – just to build our own parallel
system.”

 However: In short the answer is – if they haven’t developed a near zero-

loss low-cost regenerative braking system already then its unlikely and
the lost time due to the attempt will probably cost you a large
proportion of your sales over the next decades in much the same way
that not having the four-stroke combustion cycle internal combustion
engine or the radial tyre would affect your sales.

Why? The need and advantages of regenerative braking has been
recognised for at least 50 years.
 In that period no-one has developed a mechanical regenerative braking
system without friction components - nothing as simple by a factor of
two or three and efficient by at least an order of magnitude in terms of
losses as the CPC-KERS.
 CPC-KERS IP Licensing & Partners
◦ mark.baker@bhr-technology.com
 3 Verney Junction Business Park, Milton
Keynes MK18 2LB
 & Kings Parade, Cambridge