Comments on: Innovation Reduces Truck Fuel Consumption by 7.5%

By: swopper

swopper — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 00:17:02 +0000

The tail looks like something that wouldn’t make it pass crash test, but perhaps here lies an opportunity to modify the tail with airbags or folding zone, so that it will be actually safer than crashing into the bare back of the truck

By: Amol Khodke

Amol Khodke — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:28:21 +0000

This will be used on highways and main roads where there will be more room for them. Then as one slows down in city they would pull back to the sides of the trailer box.

By: Bigkahuna

Bigkahuna — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 03:19:39 +0000

I think it could be designed to deploy /slide back only as the truck speeds up and reaches say 50mph. This way its really used on highways and main roads where there is more room for them. Then as one slows down in town or on stop and go traffic they would pull back to the sides of the trailer box. Hence not becoming a problem during loading /unloading and while making sharp turns in tighter streets.

By: BAsM

BAsM — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:03:32 +0000

That’s strange , How they managed to provide exactly the same conditions for the truck in the two years! I mean , the same weather “wind speed”, the same acceleration time, etc , in the two years so that they can say that it reduced fuel consumption.

By: adam donofrio

adam donofrio — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:48:36 +0000

There are many simple solutions. One idea is: Have the top and bottom sections as two separate sections split in the middle which can be latched or pinned together during transit. There would be hinges joining the top (and bottom) halves to the sides which would allow the top and bottom sections to fold (parallel/in plane to the sides). Then the sides could be hinged to the truck similarly to the way the doors are hung now to fold back along the sides of the truck. Entire structure could be made out of composite for weight concerns and to “give a little” when the moron in the pickup rear ends the shipping truck. I envision the disassembly and assembly of that cone to take only about 5 minutes (time required to undo a couple latches and fold panels) and while in its disassembled/folded back state, it would be only a few inches wider than the current doors folded back. Total length of the truck would still be a concern, but may be addressed by marketing the cone as a cosmetic feature with huge fuel gains and should be given pardoned by current restrictions.

By: larry hagedon

larry hagedon — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:07:23 +0000

Across the street from me there is a hardware store. They move a lot of merchandise and resupply at least weekly.

To unload, the trucker backs through a door and inside the building to a loading dock sheltered from the weather. The point is that the funnel swiveled up on top will not fit through the door or fit inside the building.

Must be millions of businesses and warehouses similarly set up.

By: larry hagedon

larry hagedon — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:50:56 +0000

Looks to me like that lower edge is about the right height to neatly and cleanly remove the heads of anyone in a pickup truck that rear ends it.

By: Steve S

Steve S — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:05:00 +0000

No doubt European crash-test requirements would prevent such a thing being introduced.

By: Todd McCann

Todd McCann — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:41:42 +0000

I’m not an enviro-freak, but anything that can save that much energy is worth a look. I wouldn’t mind it if it was hinged like you said. Like Larry said, they’d have to adjust the length restrictions. A bigger concern might be who’s going to pay for it? If it’s voluntary, fine. But what if it’s mandatory?

By: Mark Austin

Mark Austin — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:55:02 +0000

Regarding loading problems, the new section could simply be hinged along its top edge with some sort of push rods or rams either side to push it up and out of the way for loading. It could also replace the back door of the truck.

By: larry hagedon

larry hagedon — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:06:36 +0000

How do they propose getting around the legal length limits on trucks? Is this simply coming off truck cargo length, which will reducing cargo space, dramatically increasing trucking cost?

How do they intend to load and unload a truck with this big funnel in the way? Most pallets of boxed goods are made to just fit inside, floor to ceiling, and two pallets wide, wall to wall. Having this big funnel in the way will dictate smaller pallets and dramatically decrease load capacity, and will dramatically increase loading and unloading time to work through the funnel.

Does the funnel have to be removed and reinstalled each time they back up to a dock?