Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

A Gyrobus is an electric bus that uses flywheel energy storage, not overhead
wires like a trolleybus. The name comes from the Greek language term for flywheel,
gyros. While there are no gyrobuses currently in use commercially, development in
this area continues.
A gyrobus is a special bus which does not use a normal engine. It has a big
flywheel of steel or other materials (weighing about one ton) rotating at very high
speed (RPM). By rotating at such high speed, the flywheel stores large amounts of
kinetic energy. This big wheel moves the wheels of the bus. At special stations,
electric engines accelerate the flywheel so the bus can still run. There are not many
buses of this kind because they are very expensive
The concept of a flywheel-powered bus was developed and brought to fruition
during the 1940s by Oerlikon (of Switzerland), with the intention of creating an
alternative to trolleybuses for quieter, lower-frequency routes, where full overhead-
wire electrification could not be justified. Rather than carrying an internal combustion
engine or batteries, or connecting to overhead powerlines, a gyrobus carries a large
flywheel that is spun at up to 3,000 RPM by a "squirrel cage" motor.[1] Power for
charging the flywheel was sourced by means of three booms mounted on the vehicle's
roof, which contacted charging points located as required or where appropriate (at
passenger stops en route, or at terminals, for instance). To obtain tractive power,
capacitors would excite the flywheel's charging motor so that it became a generator,
in this way transforming the energy stored in the flywheel back into electricity.
Vehicle braking was electric, and some of the energy was recycled back into the
flywheel, thereby extending its range

Fully charged, a gyrobus could typically travel as far as 6 km (3.7 mi) on a

level route at speeds of up to 50 to 60 km/h (31 to 37 mph), depending on the total
weight of passengers, as top speeds varied as passenger levels varied from stop to
stop. The installation in Yverdon-les-Bains (Switzerland) sometimes saw vehicles
needing to travel as far as 10 km (6.2 mi) on one charge, although it is not known how
well they performed towards the upper end of that distance.

1
 Charging a flywheel took between 30 seconds and 3 minutes; in an effort to
reduce the charge time, the supply voltage was increased from 380 volts to 500 volts.
Given the relatively restricted range between charges, it is likely that several charging
stops would have been required on longer routes, or in dense urban traffic. It is not
clear whether vehicles that require such frequent delays would have been practical
and/or suitable for modern-day service applications.

2
 Chapter 2
DEVELOPMENT

The concept of a flywheel-powered bus was developed and brought to fruition

during the 1940s by Oerlikon (of Switzerland), with the intention of creating an
alternative to battery-electric buses for quieter, lower-frequency routes, where full
overhead-wire electrification could not be justified. Rather than carrying an internal
combustion engine or batteries, or connecting to overhead powerlines, a gyrobus
carries a large flywheel that is spun at up to 3,000 RPM by a "squirrel cage" motor .
[1] Power for charging the flywheel was sourced by means of three booms mounted
on the vehicle's roof, which contacted charging points located as required or where
appropriate (at passenger stops en route, or at terminals, for instance). To obtain
tractive power, capacitors would excite the flywheel's charging motor so that it
became a generator, in this way transforming the energy stored in the flywheel back
into electricity. Vehicle braking was electric, and some of the energy was recycled
back into the flywheel, thereby extending its range.

Fully charged, a gyrobus could typically travel as far as 6km on a level route
at speeds of up to 50 to 60 km/h, depending on vehicle batch (load), as top speeds
varied from batch to batch. The installation in Yverdon-les-Bains (Switzerland)
sometimes saw vehicles needing to travel as far as 10 km on one charge, although it is
not known how well they performed towards the upper end of that distance. Charging
a flywheel took between 30 seconds and 3 minutes; in an effort to reduce the charge
time, the supply voltage was increased from 380 volts to 500 volts. Given the
relatively restricted range between charges, it is likely that several charging stops
would have been required on longer routes, or in dense urban traffic. It is not clear
whether vehicles that require such frequent delays would have been practical and/or
suitable for modern-day service applications.

The demonstrator was first displayed (and used) publicly in summer 1950 and,
to promote the system, this vehicle continued to be used for short periods of public
service in a myriad of locations at least until 1954.

3
 In 1979, General Electric was awarded a $5 million four-year contract by the
United States government, the Department of Energy and the Department of
Transportation, to develop a prototype flywheel bus.

In the 1980s, Volvo briefly experimented with using flywheels charged by a

small Diesel engine and recharged via braking energy. This was eventually dumped in
favour of using hydraulic accumulators. During the 1990s, CCM had developed a
flywheel for both mobile and stationary applications sometimes saw vehicles needing
to travel as far as 10 km on one charge, although it is not known how well they
performed towards the upper end of that distance. Charging a flywheel took between
30 seconds and 3 minutes; in an effort to reduce the charge time, the supply voltage
was increased from 380 volts to 500 volts. Given the relatively restricted range
between charges, it is likely that several charging stops would have been required on
longer routes, or in dense urban traffic. It is not clear whether vehicles that require
such frequent delays would have been practical and/or suitable for modern-day
service applications. The demonstrator was first displayed (and used) publicly in
summer 1950 and, to promote the system, this vehicle continued to be used for short
periods of public service in a myriad of locations at least until 1954.

In 1979, General Electric was awarded a $5 million four-year contract by the

United States government, the Department of Energy and the Department of
Transportation, to develop a prototype flywheel bus. In the 1980s, Volvo briefly
experimented with using flywheels charged by a small Diesel engine and recharged
via braking energy. This was eventually dumped in favour of using hydraulic
accumulators. During the 1990s, CCM had developed a flywheel for both mobile and
stationary applications. In 2005, the Center for Transportation and the Environment,
working with the University of Texas at Austin, Center for Electromechanics, Test
Devices, Inc., and DRS Technologies sought funding for the development of a
prototype gyrobus.

4
 Chapter 3
EARLY COMMERCIAL SERVICE

The first full commercial service began in October 1953, linking the Swiss
communities of Yverdon-les-Bains and Grandson. However, this was a route with
limited traffic potential, and although technically successful it was not commercially
viable. Services ended in late October 1960, and neither of the two vehicles (nor the
demonstrator) survived.
The next system to open was in Léopoldville in Belgian Congo (currently
Kinshasa in the Democratic Republic of the Congo). Here there were 12 vehicles
(although apparently some reports suggest 17), which operated over four routes, with
recharging facilities being provided about every 2 km. These were the largest of the
gyrobuses, being 10.4 m in length, weighing 10.9 tonnes, carrying up to 90
passengers, and having a maximum speed of 60 km/h (about 37 mph).
There were major problems related to excessive "wear and tear". One
significant reason for this was that drivers often took shortcuts across unpaved roads,
which after rains became nothing more than quagmires. Other problems included
breakage of gyro ball bearings, and high humidity resulting in traction motor
overload. The system's demise, however, came because of high energy consumption.
The bus operator deemed that 3.4 kWh/km per gyrobus was. unaffordable, so closure
came in the summer of 1959 with the gyrobuses being abandoned.

Fig 3.1 Interior of the Gyrobus G3 (front)

5
 The third location to use gyrobuses commercially was Ghent, Belgium. Three
gyrobuses started operation in late summer 1956 on a route linking Ghent and
Merelbeke (the route Gent Zuid - Merelbeke). The flywheel was in the center of the
bus, spanning almost the whole width of the vehicle, and having a vertical axis of
rotation.
The Ghent - Merelbeke route was intended to be the first of a proposed multi-
route network. Instead its Gyrobuses stayed in service for only three years, being
withdrawn late autumn 1959. The operator considered them unreliable, "spending
more time off the road than on", and that their weight damaged road surfaces. They
were also considered to be energy hungry, consuming 2.9 kWh/km — compared with
between 2.0 kWh/km and 2.4 kWh/km for trams with much greater capacity.

Fig 3.2 Interior of the Gyrobus G3 (back)

Fig 3.3 Engine of the Gyrobus G3

6
 One of Ghent's gyrobuses has been preserved and restored, and is displayed at
the VLATAM-museum in Antwerp. It is sometimes shown (and used to carry
passengers) at Belgian exhibitions, transport enthusiasts' bazaars, etc. The tram depot
in Merelbeke has been closed since 1998, but it still stands, as it is protected by the
law.

Fig 3.4 Loading up the flywheel

7
 Chapter 4
TECHANICAL SPECIFICATION

The Gyrobus prototype was built on the massive chassis of an FB W lorry

dating' from 1932. The flywheel (MFO called it the gyro) was positioned in the centre
of this chassis between the axles. This disc weighing 1.5t and with a diameter of 1.6m
was enclosed in an airtight chamber filled with hydrogen gas at a reduced pressure of
0.7 bar to lower "air" resistance. The flywheel would spin at a maximum of 3000rpm.
The principle of operation would be that the bus would "dock" into an overhead
gantry located at selected stops. Contact blades would automatically rise and deliver
three phase electricity to the flywheel at 380V.
This choice of voltage permitted the normal mains power supply to be used, so
minimising the technical installations required. The flywheel could equally be
charged by plugging it into a socket. This was the usual charging procedure atdepots.

Fig 4.1 Engine

8
 The flywheel was spun up with a three-phase asynchronous motor. The same
motor acted as a generator when disconnected from the ground supply. The choice of
an asynchronous brushless machine helped reduce friction within the
flywheelassembly to an absolute minimum. Once in generator mode, power from the
flywheel would be fed to the 52kW asynchronous traction motor, which wasarranged
longitudinally behind the rear axle. Capacitors controlled the motor torque. The
arrangement could be reversed, with energy recovered by the motor during braking or
on downhill runs being fed back to the flywheel.
In normal operation the flywheel could slow down from its initial 3000 rpm to
2100 rpm. In emergencies the speed could further be reduced to 1500 rpm, but this
would negatively affect the performance of the vehicle.

Fig 4.2 Anordnung im Gyrobus. 1 Elektrogyro; 2 Triebmotor; 3 Kon-densatoren; 4

Hilfsbatterie; 5 ijachkontakte; 6 Einscha1t- und Erdungs-kontakt; 7
Geschwindigkeits-Reguilerschalier; 8 Zugkraft-Regulier-schalter; 9 Antrieb zu 7; 10
Antrieb zu 8; 11 Lademast; 12 Einschalt-hOpfer; 13 Ladedrossel

9
 Below this speed a proper functioning of the transmission could no longer be
guaranteed. Under normal conditions, the Gyrobus could cover 5 to 6km between
charges (taking stops and traffic into account). A charge would then take two to five
minutes. In idle mode, the fywheel could continue spinning for more than ten hours.
The bus would, however, be plugged in at the depot overnight to keep the flywheel at
2850 rpm. This was done to permit a quick start in the morning and also because a full
recharge would have posed a heavy load on the grid, A recharge from standstill could
take 40 minutes. The bus could run at up to 55.

10
 Chapter 5
TYPES OF GYROBUS

5.1 YVERDON

The first order was placed by a private company in Yverdon. The Societé
aonyme Gyrobus Yverdon — Grandson (GYG) inauguarted a bus service between
those two places in 1953 using a fleet of two Gyrobuses, numbered 1 and 2. Like
the prototype, these used a chassis by FBW, a body by CWA, and electrics by MFO.

Fig 5.1 YVERDON

In contrast to the prototype, however, the chassis was purpose-designed for

Gyrobus use, and weight savings were achieved. In keeping with the times, an angular
body style was adopted. The route was 4.5km long and had four recharging points. In
order to speed-up the charging process, the charging voltage was raised from 380V to
500V in 1954. The small fleet was joined by the prototype that year, with the new

11
arrival being numbered 3. The extremely light loadings of the route caused financial
difficulties and led to service cuts. Rather than turing the company's fortunes around,
these led to even greater difficulties. The high electricity consumption and other costs
led GYG to replace its Gyrobuses by diesel minibuses in 1960.
5.2 LÉOPOLDVILLE

Fig 5.2 LÉOPOLDVILLE

The next order came from Léopoldville in the Belgian Congo (today Kinshasa
in D.R. Congo). The 12 buses ordered were largely similar to those of Yverdon and
were numbered 101-112. The operator, Société: des transports en commun de
Léopoldville (TCL) used them on a four-route system of about 20km, making it the
largest Gyrobus system ever operated. However poor operating conditions and the
tendency for drivers to deviate from the official routes and drive on rough unmade
roads lead to heavy wear and tear. Consequently, TCL made generous use of its
warranty rights with MFO to obtain spare parts. The outbreak of war in 1959 finally
put an end to Gyrobus operations in Léopoldville.

5.3 Gent

The third operator to acquire Gyrobuses was the Belgian SNCV/NMVB.

Three buses numbered G1 to G3 (later 1451-3) were supplied by the usual
consortium, but presented a more rounded front-end, maybe more in line with Belgian
tatses. The Gent Merelbeke service replaced a tram line in 1956. This line was and
remained an island operation.

12
It was especially the high costs of electricity that led to abandonment in 1959. One
vehicle has survived and is preserved in the tram museum in Antwerpen. This vehicle,
the only know Gyrobus survivor, visited Yverdon in 2003 to mark the 50th
anniversary of that system. Other gyro applications. Besides these Gyrobuses, it
should be noted that similar flywheels by MFO found use on various mining
locomotives in Switzerland, Belgium and in Africa.

One of the main obstacles facing the Gyrobus was its inability to gain a firm
market presence and so cut down manufacturing costs through economy of scale. A
further recurring issue was the high cost of electricity (or shall we say low cost of
fuel). Furthermore, the manufacturers would appear to have been unfortunate in their
choice of pilot projects, with many of the problems being external rather than strictly

13
technical. Not necessarily a disadvantage but certainly a point worth noting was the
dynamic behaviour of the vehicle. The spinning flywheel acts like a giant gyroscope
and so resists changes in orientation. This had to be taken into account be the driver
and so induced an adapted driving technique. At the same time, this gyroscope effect
led to a very smooth ride. As reduced comfort through eratic driving is precisely an
argument that is often used against buses, this is certainly something worth looking
into.
In today's environment, many of the factors that disadvantaged the Gyrobus
have changed. Fuel prices are rising and concerns over pollution and smog have led to
experiments with such inefficient and dangerous storage technologies as hydrogen
cells (which appear to be more in political favour than technologically sound). Would
a simpler, safer and more comfortable alternative not do the same in a friendlier
manner? Modern power electronics would help reduce powerconsumption whilst also
enabling faster charging. Modern materials could help reduce the overall weight of
the bus while retaining the required robustness. Maybe the Gyrobus is far from dead.

14
 Chapter 6
ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES

6. 1 ADVANTAGE

 "Pollution-free" (Pollution confined to generators on electric power grid.)

 Runs without rails (An advantage because the route can be varied at will.)
 Can operate flexibly at varying distances

6.2 DISADVANTAGES

 Weight: a bus which can carry 20 persons and has a range of 20 km requires a
flywheel weighing three tonnes.
 The flywheel, which turns at 3000 revolutions per minute, requires special
attachment and security — because the external speed of the disk is 900 km/h.
 Driving a gyrobus has the added complexity that the flywheel acts as a
gyroscope that will resist changes in orientation, for example when a bus tilts
while making a turn, assuming that the flywheel has a horizontal rotation axis.

15
 Chapter 7
FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS

After the Gyrobus was discontinued in all locations, there have been a number
of attempts to make the concept work. Recently, there have been two successful
projects, though the original idea of storing energy has been changed considerably: In
Dresden, Germany there is the "Autotram", a vehicle that looks like a modern tram,
but moves on a flat surface, not on tracks. It has run since 2005 and is powered by a
flywheel, though the wheel is small and only used to store energy from braking. The
main source of energy is a fuel cell. The second successful vehicle was the Capabus,
which ran at the Expo 2010 in Shanghai. It was charged with electricity at the stops -
just like the Gyrobus was. However, instead of using a flywheel for energy storage the
Capabus utilized capacitors.

16
 Chapter 8
CONCLUSION

Since 1955 there have been some practical applications of electrogyrobuses. Such
buses are equipped with a flywheel unit consisting of an asynchronous motor and
generator coupled to a flywheel and of electric traction motors. The unwinding of the
flywheel of an electrogyrobus is accomplished with the aid of an electric motor. The
stored kinetic energy is sufficient for traveling a distance of 4-5 km. The efficiency of
an electrogyrobus is not better than 50 percent. The weight-towork ratio of the
flywheel unit is 322 kg/kWh (32 times greater than that of the
currently used electrochemical current sources). The unit operational expenses of an
electrogyrobus are 5 percent greater than those of a trolleybus and 20 percent greater
than those of an autobus. Experimental electrogyrobuses have been operated on some
interurban runs, for instance, between Ghent and Merelbeke (Belgium). The
electrogyrobus is an auxiliary means of passenger transport on short runs; it is also
usable in transporting dangerously explosive objects.

17
 Chapter 9
REFERENCES

[1] "the GYROBUS: Something New Under the Sun?". Motor Trend: p. p37.
January 1952.
[2] Access to Energy Newsletter, Archive Volume: Volume 7, Issue/No.: Vol. 7, No.
8, Date: April 01, 1980 03:23 PM, Title: Anniversary of the Grand Disaster,
Article: The Flywheel Bus is Back
[3] Center View (CTE) Spring 2005

18