检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:徐建全[1,2] 杨沿平[1] 唐杰[1] 陈轶嵩[1] 殷仁述[1]
机构地区:[1]湖南大学汽车车身先进设计制造国家重点实验室,长沙410082 [2]福建农林大学机电工程学院,福州350002
出 处:《汽车工程》2012年第6期540-543,共4页Automotive Engineering
基 金:国家自然科学基金项目(70973034和71173072);教育部博士点基金项目(20090161110008)资助
摘 要:对纯电动客车和燃油客车的轻量化效果进行对比分析。结果表明,两者轻量化的节能效果没有明显的差别,但纯电动客车轻量化还有另一收益,即可使续驶里程显著增加,从而减少动力电池的更换次数,降低电池使用成本。因此,在两种客车减少相同质量,为轻量化付出相同成本的条件下,纯电动客车的轻量化收益高于燃油客车。在目前动力电池成本高、关键技术尚未突破的状况下,纯电动汽车比燃油汽车对轻量化的需求更为迫切。The lightweighting effects of electric buses and fuel buses are comparatively analyzed. The re- sults show that the energy saving effects of !ightweighting for two kinds of buses have no obvious difference, but the lightweighting of electric buses has an additional benefit, i.e. the significant increase in driving range, and hence reduction of battery replacement times, leading to lower cost of battery use. Therefore providing two kinds of bu- ses spend the same cost in lightweighting and reduce the same amount of mass, the benefit of lightweighting for elec- tric buses is higher than that for fuel buses. In current situation of high battery cost with key technologies remained to be broken through, the lightweighting demands for electric vehicles are more urgent than fuel vehicles.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.145