Honda: Development and Technology News
 

Honda reduces cost of building fuel cell cars
Reuters / October 10, 2003

TOKYO (Reuters) -- Honda Motor Co. has brought the mass production of zero-emission hydrogen vehicles a step closer to reality by developing a cheaper-to-make, high-performance fuel cell stack needed to power the cars.

Japan's No. 2 automaker said Friday that the new fuel cell stack is lighter, smaller and 10 percent more fuel efficient than the fuel cell it now uses and can operate in temperatures as low as minus 4. Its current fuel cell vehicle can only run in above-freezing conditions.

Fuel cell vehicles are touted as the ultimate "green car" since they emit only water as a byproduct, creating electricity by combining hydrogen and oxygen, but mass production is believed to be at least a decade away due to high costs and lack of infrastructure to supply and store hydrogen.

Honda declined to give details on the scope of cost reduction the technology would achieve, but Yuji Kawaguchi, senior chief engineer at Honda R&D Co., said cost savings were big.

A gasoline engine can produce one kilowatt of energy for about $50, while a one-kilowatt fuel cell on the market today costs about $5,000.

"We want to be able to sell the fuel cell stack as soon as possible, although we have no concrete plans at the moment," Kawaguchi said in a news conference.

Honda's new fuel cell stack features a separator made of metal that is stamped together, compared with conventional separators made of carbon that need to be fastened with bolts. The technology almost halves the number of components, bringing down production time and costs.

The stack also uses newly developed "aromatic" electrolyte membranes made of petroleum-based material instead of the more expensive and complex fluorine electrolyte membranes used in Honda's current fuel cell vehicle.

The new features also increase driving range by 25 miles to 245 miles, although that is short of the minimum 300 miles believed to be needed to make fuel cell vehicles truly practical.

Honda is one of only a handful of automakers with a salable fuel cell vehicle on the road, but it has been using fuel cells developed by Canada's Ballard Power Systems. Ballard and Honda have a three-year supply pact until 2005.

Kawaguchi said Honda's new fuel cell stack is better than any on the road but stressed its relationship with Ballard would not change.

"We will continue to cooperate and compete with Ballard," he said.

Bigger rivals like Toyota Motor Corp. and General Motors Corp. also have salable fuel cell vehicles on the road, using fuel cell stacks developed in-house.

cool

Honda: Development and Technology news
 

Honda may manufacture more hybrids; minivan concept hints at future


By DAVID SEDGWICK | Automotive News

TOKYO -- Honda Motor Co. is betting that hybrid powertrains eventually will account for 5 percent of its worldwide sales, and a wide variety of vehicles could get them.

At the Tokyo Motor Show, Honda unveiled the ASM, an eight-seat minivan powered by a V-6 engine and an electric motor. The vehicle is expected to go into production in Japan in late 2004 or early 2005. A gasoline version of the minivan will be on the Japanese market next spring.

Honda CEO Takeo Fukui hinted that other hybrids might be on the way.

"We would like to target 5 percent of worldwide sales for hybrids," Fukui said. "Japan and the United States would be the most promising markets. We have prepared ourselves for a wide application of technology. Now it is up to the regions to decide what they need."

But hybrids aren't likely to sell well in Europe, Fukui cautioned: "Europe is a tough market, productwise. The Europeans (prefer) diesels."

And it's not clear whether Honda will sell a hybrid-powered minivan in the United States. Thomas Elliott, executive vice president of American Honda Motor Co. Inc., said U.S. customers are accustomed to cheap gasoline.

"Fuel efficiency is important to the buyer, but it's not the primary motive," he said. "You've got to have good fuel economy, but not great fuel economy."

One barrier to wider acceptance is cost. Fukui said hybrid powertrains are more costly than conventional gasoline engines. That's why Honda will have to evaluate hybrid-powered vehicles case-by-case.

"With hybrids, the issue is cost," Fukui said. "You shouldn't be simple-minded and assume that hybrids are the only solution."

During an interview with Automotive News, Fukui offered views on a variety of topics:


A full-sized pickup is not in Honda's product plans for the United States. "We are not thinking of any such thing," he said. "We don't have a body-on-frame vehicle, and we don't have a V-8." But sources say Honda is considering unveiling a small concept pickup built on a unibody platform at the Detroit auto show in January.


Currency fluctuations will force Honda to re-examine its business plan for the year. The automaker had assumed a currency valuation of 115 yen to the dollar. The dollar has fallen below 110 yen, but Fukui said Honda's extensive North American production offers some protection from the stronger yen.


Honda will export vehicles and components from China but does not expect the country to become a major export base. Honda plans to export 20 percent to 30 percent of the vehicles it produces there, Fukui said. It also expects to ship some China-made parts to assembly plants overseas. But those parts exports will be relatively minor. "Even for Chinese components, our focus is not on export," he said. "Our philosophy is to produce where we sell."

Like previous Honda chief executives, Fukui rose on the strength of his engineering prowess. Fukui served as president of Honda R&D Co. and was a member of the team that developed the famous CVCC engine that allowed the Honda Civic to meet U.S. emissions standards without using a catalytic converter.

Honda: Hybrid news **Push to Sell in China (page 3)**
 

Shuold increase this year with the addition of the Accord :thumbsup:

Honda: Aviation Engine news
 

Honda Establishes Aviation Engine Business Subsidiary in the U.S.
Date: July 15, 2004 14:05
Submitted by: Tuan
Source: Honda Press Release
Credibility Rating: N/A

TOKYO, Japan 07/15/2004 -- Honda Motor Co., Ltd., today announced that it has established a new U.S. subsidiary, Honda Aero, Inc., to focus on the aviation engine business in the U.S., the world's largest aviation market. The new aviation engine business unit will be located at a yet-to-be-determined location in the U.S., with plans to become operational by the end of the year. In addition, Honda has established the Wako Nishi R&D Center in Japan, dedicated to the research and development of aviation engines. This new center will consolidate and strengthen the turbofan jet engine development currently done at the Wako Research Center, and the development of piston aircraft engines currently conducted at the Asaka R&D Center.

In the meantime, the Wako Research Center will continue its research and development efforts for the HondaJet, an experimental prototype aircraft currently undergoing test flights in Greensboro, North Carolina, in the U.S.

Honda Aero, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Honda Motor Co., Ltd., will be responsible for Honda's aviation engine business, including such functions as contract negotiations, procurement, and preparations for production. Honda Aero will prepare for commercialization of the HF118 turbofan jet engine, marking Honda's first step into the jet engine business.

Honda's research efforts for small jet engines and jet aircraft began in 1986. Development of the Honda HF118 engine, which fits in the smallest category of the business jet engine class, began in 1999. Full-scale flight tests of the HF118 engine have been conducted aboard Honda's prototype HondaJet aircraft, since December 2003.

The HF118 engine is designed for light business jets, a category with an estimated annual market of 150 to 200 units, and where further growth is expected in the future.

Honda and General Electric Co. (GE), the world's largest jet engine manufacturer, signed a basic agreement February 16, 2004, to jointly pursue commercialization of Honda's HF118 jet engine. Issues such as marketing strategy, business structure and production are under discussion. The signing of a final agreement with GE is anticipated before the end of the year.

Honda will accelerate research and development efforts at the Wako Nishi R&D Center, in anticipation of mass production of the HF118 engine. The newly registered Honda Aero, Inc. will take the lead in accelerating the development of business activities.

About Honda Aero, Inc.
CEO: Junichi Araki
Incorporation: July 1, 2004
Location: TBD by the end of 2004
Investment ratio: Honda Motor Co., Ltd. 100%
Employment: Approximately 10 associates
Business Areas: Contract negotiations, procurement, and production preparations for aviation engine business

About Wako Nishi R&D Center
General Manager: Kazunobu Sato
Establishment: July 1, 2004
Location: 1-4-1Chuo,Wako-city,Saitama-prefecture, Japan (located at site of current Wako Research Center)
R&D Areas: Design and development of aviation engines

Gee, I wonder when CompTech will come out with some aircraft engine mods. :D

:ecstatic: :ecstatic: :ecstatic: :racing: :racing: :woot: :woot:

Pretty cool, but in the end nothing to get too terribly excited over. It's a very small engine that isn't very technically exciting, but it could have great growth if the air taxi market takes over. That's why GE decided to partner with Honda.

If you want to see an awesome aircraft engine, the GE90-115B is tops. It produces ~120,000 lbs of thrust per engine vs ~1,000-3000lbs of thrust from the Honda engine.

BTW... Honda will never be a big player. They are a niche player for a very small market. They don't have the R&D capacity to compete with the big 3 (GE, P&W, RR)

do planes have transmissions? if so, UH OH!

seriously though, honda CAN make a solid product but i think they should focus more and spend this money into the auto market rather than trying to make way into every single market that has a motor!

sidemarker

i find it hard to believe that Honda couldn't do whatever they want to do.

:agree:

I know what I'm talking about in this regard to this subject because I work for one of these companies.

Look at GE vs Honda. GE has been building jet engines for since the late 1940's (right after WW2 for the US govt). So have P&W and RR. Building aircraft engines are highly complex, take a tremendous amount of capital and years of both R&D and very strict safety standards. It would be like some company being able to start competing with Boeing and Airbus building commercial jets.

It took Honda almost 20 years to develop this engine (started development in 1986) that produces between 1,000-3000 lbs of thrust. Compare that to the 120,000 lbs of thrust from a GE90-115B.

BTW, GE is over 8.5x the size of Honda (based on market capitalization) than Honda and even larger in other levels. Honda can't and won't compete in regards to devoting the $$ or resources towards this already crowded market. That's why they decided to become a niche player with for the air taxi market. It's a good move but you won't be seeing Honda engines on your commercial jet or military jet anytime soon or ever.

:ibdfrederposts:

Different sized engines deliver different numbers. Not a very fair comparo IMO :2cents:

:rofl: Damn! You beat me to it! :rofl:


On a side note, do you think all Honda-equipped planes will be front-wheel drive? :D

What the hell is an air taxi?

They're for short-hop, intra-regional flights, where small, reasonably fast planes are more economical than the bigger planes including the 30-50 seat regional jets.

Think Chicago to Milwaukee, Baltimore to Washington DC., Orlando to Tampa, etc.

technological innovation and progression isn't linear. Honda is small company yet they still compete with alot of bigger auto manfucturers. Not saying it'll happen overnight but to be so dismissive......

I hope they don't use the current transmission supplier to help with cooling issues and paper nozzles :eek:

Yes, but the amount of technical innovation and capacity to produce an engine producing this power is immense.

Check out the specs of the GE90-115B and see what I'm talking about.

Some people here give Honda WAY too much credit

Listen. I work in this industry. I know what I'm talking about. Honda has no plans to complete against the big boys. They are fine being a niche player.

And sorry, but building a car is much less complex than building a Jet engine.

It took Honda 18 years to produce 1 engine. And an engine that only produces a tiny amount of thrust. It's good for what it is, but it's nothing special. GE/RR/P&W have a 50+ year head start building engines.

If Honda was investing in new technology such as Ram-Jets, then I'd be impressed

I guess they will be advertising the high fuel economy of their planes, lol.
WE DON"T NEED TWIN JETS LIKE THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY WHEN OUR 1 JET IS ALMOST AS GOOD!!
Honda took like 30 years to make a damn V-6. This should be fun.

Maybe if they were SCRAM-JETs....


http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/video/39...06_west_vi.ram

So, when is GE buying Honda?? They buy just about everyone else. :D

no need to repeat yourself.....i didn't disagree with anything you said. Too eliminate the growth of company which will compete in the future is wrong imho.....i don't care what industry you are in.

I guess you work for GE :dunno: we hear ya I just think that they CAN compete on a smaller level. I really dont see Honda going after your niche

what the hell, they can't build a v8 but they can build an airplane engine

It's not that they can't...it's just they refuse to. They have V10s with their Formula1 cars.

:rofl:

No. Airplanes do not use transmissions at all. Direct drive only, no matter what type.

Do we use transmissions? The answer is both no and yes, but if I had to pick one, it would be no.

Before I explain, here is a quick explanation on how any aircraft part is designed:

1. Engineer envisions concept for part.
2. Engineer specifies material (aluminum, carbon fibre, etc) and designs part on computer.
3. Engineer prints blueprint, hands off to manufacturing for fabrication of prototype part.
4. Prototype part is given to Engineer.
5. Engineer tests part by throwing it up into the air.
6. Prototype part hits the ground.
7. Engineer evaluation. Part to heavy. Time for redesign.

The point here is that we cannot afford any frivilous weight so we have no transmissions. These things, either simple piston or turbofan engines are direct drive affairs. Plus, transmissions would be counter productive. Transmissions have the capability of reducing TORQUE.

Now, why the answer could be considered to be yes. When you go to more complex airplanes, the first (and only) thing I like to give my students is an airplane with a constant speed propellor. You guys have heard of in cars, the CVT, or constantly variable transmission? It is exactly the same principle.

To make this easy, forget the takeoff and the climb. We're cruising straight and level at 5,000 feet and I have the prop set to maintain 2,500 rpm, a good cruise value. And right now the oil pressure, which controls the prop pitch is a certain psi. We decide to climb to 10,000. So we advance to full throttle, usually 2,700 rpm and raise the nose. Now the oil pressure rises for two reasons. More demand on the engine, and more load on the engine to pull 3,000 pounds up another 5,000 feet. The higher oil pressure which controls the blade pitch, decreases the blade pitch to maintain the efficiency of the prop which maintains the speed of the prop. Hence, constant speed is the moniker. If any of that confuses you, figure it this way, and you have a CLS 6 speeder: You have sixth gear for cruising, and fourth gear for power. It is so damn hard to explain flying to non pilots.

And this also explains why airplane engines and car engines are as different as men and women.

Car engine: long stroke+small bore=high hp but not so much torque. This is called "oversquared".
Air engine: short stroke+ wide bore=lower hp but gobs of torque. This is called "undersquared."

An experiment for you to understand the last two sentances.

Car engine: Drive your CLS6 at 30 mph in 6th gear and floor it. measure the time to 50 mph.
Air engine: Do the same, but use second gear.

Horsepower means almost absolutely nothing to an airplane pilot. Torque does. When things get dicey, I want all of the prop twisting force I can get, and I want it now. It saves my ass from coliding with the ground.

Another difference. The CL engine is only 195 cid, but peak horsepower is 260. A Continental IO-540 is 540(!) cubic inches, and produces only 300 hp. But I'll tell you one thing. Take that IO-540 at idle on a west pointing runway and ram the throttle home, you will be pointing south in less than 5 seconds. We have torque!

So, in the end, we have no classic transmission, but maybe a two speed selector switch. This explanation is greatly simplified for the neophyte.

I am not gonna even attempt to explain turbojet/turbofan engines. That is a whole different subject.

But good luck to Honda/Lexus/Porsche in entering these markets. For those like me involved, we have basically two choices: Continental and Lycoming. Both make very fine aircraft engines, but speaking for the piston powered market only, this is basically an oligarhy. Competetion is needed.

BTW, I believe the transmission comment was a joke or rather a knock on Honda for the 5AT debacle.

Most are aware that aircraft do not have transmissions. :)

neither do I.....of course honda can't go after GE but to say they can NEVER do it is insane.

Depending on the design, and if you're talking about some novel designs, you end up with a transmission -- or basically a set of gears.

There was one innovative plane that had two turboprops in its belly and needed a gearbox to combine the outputs for redundancy. A pusher prop showed greater promise for efficiency, and this is even considering the myriad high-bypass turbofans available.

There are more than a few helicopters, planes, and other craft that do quite nicely with a "gearbox" in them.

If you'd like to differentiate between gear shifts and other issues -- well, go ahead...

And, not every prop is driven by a piston engine (irregardless of topology).

And, the subject was Honda jet engine, not piston engine -- hey?

Honda: Engine news **Next Generation Engines (page 17)**
 

Honda considering diesels for U.S. market; engineers confident of meeting standards - - YUZO YAMAGUCHI | Automotive News - - Source: Autoweek


TOKYO - Honda Motor Co. is studying whether to bring diesel engines to the United States.

Honda has no immediate plans, but its engineers are confident that they can reduce harmful emissions from the company's diesel engines to meet stringent U.S. standards.

"We've got to cut NOx (oxides of nitrogen) and PM (particulates matter), so that we can get ready to get in the U.S. market" if diesel demand rises, said Kenichi Nagahiro, the senior chief engineer in charge of diesel engines.

Honda Motor CEO Takeo Fukui supports the effort. "There would be room in America for a diesel vehicle to get in" he said at a company press event here last week. Honda already sells diesel-powered cars in Europe.

Honda is trying to cut NOx emissions to meet California standards - 0.07 grams per mile. The diesel-powered Honda Accord, which is sold in Europe, emits about 0.28 grams per mile, Nagahiro said. The Accord's diesel engine was designed and manufactured by Honda.

He said it's a "big challenge" to meet the California standards, but he expects Honda to do it "in the near future." Nagahiro declined to say when.

Some automakers are looking at offering diesels in the fall of 2006, when petroleum companies will start selling low-sulfur diesel fuel in the United States. Low-sulfur diesel fuel permits lower NOx emissions.

Under today's emission standards, diesels are common on full-sized pickups in the United States. Volkswagen offers diesels in the Golf, New Beetle, Jetta, Passat and Touareg. Mercedes is selling a diesel-powered E class, and Jeep will start selling a diesel-powered Liberty this fall.

Both California and the federal government have adopted significantly tougher tailpipe emission standards that are being phased in during the 2004-09 model years. They aim for sharp cuts in NOx and particulates, which are problems for diesels.

The federal standard, while similar to California's, provides flexibility, accommodating some diesels in states that don't use the California rules.

A diesel-powered car typically gets about 25 percent better mileage than an equivalent gasoline-powered car. Demand for diesels could rise significantly if gasoline prices, hovering around $2 a gallon, stay high, as many experts predict they will. Diesel fuel costs about 10 cents a gallon less than regular-grade gasoline.

But American consumers largely have shunned diesels because the vehicles have been smelly, noisy or dirty.

"That kind of image can be erased by a technology," Nagahiro said.

Mercedes-Benz plans to include a urea tank in each diesel E320 sold in the United States beginning in late 2006 or early 2007. Urea reduces NOx to elemental nitrogen and water vapor.

Staff Reporter Harry Stoffer contributed to this report

I can totally see a Diesel Accord making sense...

edit