Delphi’s new 48 V mild hybrid system could see production in 18 months

Delphi

Delphi Automotive (NYSE: DLPH) has unveiled a new 48-volt mild hybrid vehicle solution. The company says it is working with two global automakers on the system, and it could go into production within 18 months.

Delphi’s mild hybrid technology, which it showcased in a Honda Civic diesel, uses electrification to minimize the demand on the engine, which the company says increases low-end torque by 25% while lowering CO2 emissions by more than 10%.

48 Volt Mild Hybird 2016v

“Car buyers will buy 48-volt mild hybrids for the added performance, and car companies will offer the technology because it will help them comply with environmental regulations,” said Jeff Owens, Delphi’s Chief Technology Officer. “One out of every 10 cars sold globally in 2025 will be a 48-volt mild hybrid. That’s 11 million units a year – three times the volume of pickup trucks sold annually.”

“This is not only a significant step forward with reinventing the electrical architecture for dual voltage capability, it is also a triumph of software,” said Owens. “This intelligent approach to vehicle power, wiring and data management will not only improve fuel efficiency, but will also enable a world-class driving experience while providing additional power for active safety systems and increased connectivity in the car.”

 


 

Source: Delphi via Green Car Congress

  • Deborah Marie Flower Power

    I totally love that it recharges the battery during braking…Awesome kinetic 🙂

    • Raymond Ramírez

      The full hybrids do this, too, and use that regenerated energy to drive the wheels at low speeds where the gas engine wastes the most.

  • Ramon A. Cardona

    This technology is called “stop/start” and should not be identified as “hybrid,” mild or otherwise. For any car to be termed hybrid it needs to power the vehicle’s motion. GM calls it “e-assist” which is more appropriate.

  • nordlyst

    I’m sorry, but this tech is irrelevant. We need to cut GLOBAL emissions by 90%, and we few Westerners emit most, which means we are required to cut even more. Transport in a big sector, and cars live for two decades. We know how to cut emissions far more drastically than this, at a very reasonable price (over it’s life, the total cost of an EV – that is, a battery car – is already lower to society and at LEAST competitive to the consumer). So any technology proposing a ten percent improvement is a bad joke.

  • Charles Alvin Scott

    I think Mr Owens will have problems selling this to the mass market that we all know is there.

    The ideal Electric Vehicle will be truthfully zero emission not plugging into a grid or using fossil fuels in any way. It will have hydrogen as the energy carrier and produce its own fuel on board the vehicle.

    These may well initially be new light weight platforms such as Riversimple RASA with a small fuel cell and super capacitors. Or it could be a EV powered by HyPulJet.2.0 Hydrogen Pulse Jet Rotary Engine-generator will own fuel supply and again super capacitors.

    Getting rid of the heavy battery pack and the gas tanks is part of the equation for a small power unit where fuel consumption can be met on board. With a normal vehicle, with no need for a large, heavy, petrol or diesel engine and transmission, the weight which has to be moved is very much reduced and I believe that a prototype HyPulJet.2.0 H2 Ro Engine-generator can be engineered to do the job of work.

    Even though the Hydrogen and Oxygen fuel is intended to be produced from water, it has to be remembered, that the volume of water will add weight and it needs to be as small as possible to keep the weight to a minimum, so the engine has to be small and super frugal.

    To aid this I have been contemplating condensing the exhaust steam and recycling the water back to the tank. Even though there will still be loss, it will still help to create an extended range for a given tank capacity.

    Any vehicle technology company still spending money on development of vehicles with IC engines and mechanical transmission is wasting money, they have a short life span left. No matter what, they will not be selling in millions for many more years.

    In a similar manner any one with a modicum of common sense can see that Plug in BEVs have a limited “fuel supply” based on the spare capacity which is in the grids. Unless there is massive battery storage systems Super chargers will not make it and home charging will have to be at midnight or use Fossil Fuel electrons which defeats the object of EVs.

    Hydrogen on board the vehicle is the key to electric transport. At the same time the same engine-generator will perform as a Smart generator for a Off-grid house.

    Lower costs for the consumer and the highest level of cuts in CO2 than any other method.

    Al Scott

    • Bob Stephens

      I have been reading all your dreaming tripe for years on here. Every excuse you get you push this unknown concept HyPulJet 2.0. Why dont you just shut the duck up and get a prototype up instead carping on about something that is unlikely to ever see the light of day you spin doctor.

      • Charles Alvin Scott

        Bob, Thats very kind of you to have taken an interest to note that I keep trying to interest someone or company to take a look at the details. It has been recently assessed by Southampton University who found that the “Novel” design, method and processes are “Plausible”.

        To correct you slightly I have only been on here since 2012 HyPuljet originates in 2008-9 and filed First UK Patent Application 2014 if you think that I am spinning you a yarn check out GB 2525153 the Patent Application covers the Oxygen enrichment of compressed air to improve the combustion in a Hydrogen Rotary engine.

        To add too that you might also check out Eco 1 H2 Gas Rotary Engine prototyped by The Highland and Islands University Scotland. This is Patented but it uses as an improvement Additional Oxygen which is not covered by his Patent. This proves the basis of my theory.

        However I have moved on with two important improvements one which stops NOx formation but will improve the power of the jets or lower the fuel needed. In the best traditions of engines there will be a bit of both used.

        Lower fuel needed means that the fuel can be produced on board the EV.

        The more powerful jets brought about a complete redesign to make better use of the more powerful jets. One result is a separate drive to a dedicated generator to power the on board fuel production system.

        This is as good as anything I have seen on these pages and anything which is being offered by Auto Companies as the future of Electric Vehicles.

        If Linked In and Articles which people post as Links, are not to make others in the same field aware of a concept or project, to offer/ask for collaboration on a similar project, then what is it for.

        Perhaps you have little idea of what funding is involved to prototype a new type of engine. MAHLE home page had a new three cylinder petrol range extender engine from paper to production ready £9.5 million.
        I have two options at present, the basic is to complete the Crowd Funding bid which was supposed to include a costing list/Quote from Southampton Uni so now I have to find another Uni or Precision Engineering Co to collaborate. I have also made an entry into an Innovation funding programme.

        One day you soon you may well be able to say I called that guy a “Spin Doctor”. I can say one thing “My wife is by far a worse critic than you will ever be and she knows that she will be proved wrong if we arrive at the funding.
        Best Regards
        Al Scott Team HyPulJet

        • Bob Stephens

          A check with the UK Intellectual property office reveals that this is not a published document yet so how to “check it out”?

          • Charles Alvin Scott

            Hi Bob, Don’t know what is wrong but the original Patent Application prior to publication was GB1401857.6 with the first two digits signifying the year. This Patent Application was published 21st October 2015 with a publication number GB2525153.

            That is reading from a UK IPO letter 21st September 2015.

            You are doing something wrong. It has not been granted yet and who knows there may be debates ahead, have to see.

          • Bob Stephens

            That updated number does not appear in a UK Patent office search at
            https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/intellectual-property-office

          • Charles Alvin Scott

            Wrong again Bob I have just completed the search too simple and I am absolute rubbish with computers. Click Search Patents and type GB2525153 into the box and click GO

  • OpenMind

    Whilst I see the case for Hydrogen as put by Al Scott above, his concerns about grid capacity isn’t shared by all. A big slice of the power required for EV’s can come from charging them with excess electricity on a timely basis, and the the EV could displace some of the need for battery storage and large scale projects like hydro schemes devised to utilise base load off peak generation. I do buy into the fact that although you get approximately 2 x the power at the wheels of an EV compared to a car fuelled by hydrogen, on a point of generation to wheels basis, that the power consumed by lugging heavy batteries around every mile you travel has to be taken into account. The story continues, but I think its going be a range of solutions for different scenarios that will eventually win the day. The smart money is on who will come up with those winning combinations of tech for the motorist of the future,

  • Raymond Ramírez

    Although this may help gas engine vehicles, it is “old fashioned” and not worth the extra cost, except for large vehicles, where a small assist will get the best gains in comparison with small imports. The cost for a full hybrid have dropped, both in the electric drive units (EDU) and battery pack cost. This is why GM has left the “eAssist” behind and producing full hybrids for the 2016 Chevy Malibu and the 2017 Buick LaCrosse.

  • Ian Porter

    I identify with this actually. Personally, I drive a 4.1 litre 6 cyl fairly heavy automatic running on LPG. I regularly drive a 220km trip largely at full 110km cruising speed. The trip costs me A$13.50 with LPG at 67c/litre. Pretty economical. Around town its a different story – the car is a REAL gas guzzler and 220km costs me 3x this amount at least. The accel/deceleration is where all the losses are. Instead of having to do this with the engine, I had thought of adding a hybrid system by installing a DC wheel motors and a battery pack with manual controls. Unfortunately, I don’t do enough km in a year to justify the expense but I am sure its worth the investment if you were going to do a lot of town driving and typical average motoring kms (that I don’t do).