作为Lucid Motors公司CAE碰撞与安全动力系统部总监，David Moseley的工作可能是整个汽车行业中最具吸引力、也最让人羡慕的职位。在WCX17 – SAE 2017全球汽车年会的领导人峰会小组讨论中，Moseley曾提出，“未来10年后，你将如何开车？开什么车？甚至还会开车吗？”在Moseley看来，汽车的电池动力系统与内燃机动力系统并没太大不同，都不过是动力系统而已。另外，Moseley还介绍了自己为什么决定直接掏钱预定了一款Lucid Air豪华电动轿车。

SAE：随着汽车电气化的不断发展，汽车工业是否应该不再使用“动力系统”(Powertrain)的说法，转而称之为“推进系统”(Propulsion)呢？

David：我觉得继续使用“动力系统”的说法没有问题。对我而言，无论是内燃机、燃料电池、电池/电机，还是《星球大战》里的曲速穿越机，这都不过代表一系列的能量转化方式而已，我们没有必要为每一种新的动力系统设计一种专门的说法。我本人挺喜欢“动力系统”（Powertrain）这个叫法，每次听到这个词，我的脑海里都会浮现出一系列紧密配套的组件共同努力，一起将乘客送到目的地的画面。

Lucid Motors公司LucidAir原型车的渲染图。据了解，Lucid Air豪华轿车将采用AWD驱动，功率输出高达1000hp，预计将在位于亚利桑那州的工厂生产，并于2018年起售。

SAE：我们总是忍不住去讨论内燃机汽车与电动汽车组件数量之间的差别。这个差距真的很大吗？电动汽车所需要的原材料种类是不是少很多，开发过程也更加简单呢？

David：事实上，可能正是因为这个原因，一家小小的创业公司才敢去梦想打造一辆自己的汽车。

认真来讲，对于一家初创公司而言，要开发一件像汽车这么复杂的产品，谨记这一点非常重要。总的来说，制造电动汽车并不需要一下子安排大量人力，只要随着产品设计的不断推进逐步增加即可。这点非常重要，因为通常而言，过早地开始承受过于沉重的人员负担，一定会限制项目的推进，早期项目根本无法满足这些需求，相关设计也一定会受到限制。此外，由于电动汽车的设计从来就没有什么正式的开发流程，但你可以从合作途径、工作方式，甚至办公室布局方面做出不同选择，支持年轻公司的成长，正如标准产品开发流程对成熟公司的帮助一样。对于一家“从零开始”的公司来说，这点才是真正宝贵且必不可少的。

我想你可能会说，一个成熟组织可以利用的技术背景、系统支持及人力资源都更加充足，而且相关经验也更加丰富。对比之下，初创公司并没有这些优势，因此像Lucid这样的小公司则更加依赖工程师个人的卓越才能。

真正了解并直面这些问题，远比一门心思地分辨内燃机汽车与电动汽车之间的差别要重要得多。

据Lucid Motors介绍，这款Air采用了专利锂离子电池技术及公司自主研发的电机，续航里程可达400英里，静止加速至60英里也仅需2.5秒。

SAE：由于电动汽车并不会直接产生排放，那么是否电动汽车在获得各类监管部门认证方面的难度会低很多呢？

David：随着电动汽车技术的不断成熟，我真的很难说内燃系统与电动系统之间的差异具体有多大。但我可以向你保证，我们的电动系统研发也曾遇到一些非常难以解决的挑战，应用过一些非常复杂精密的技术。无论是对快速充电的锂离子电池单体进行3D X光断层摄影，还是在精密油雾系统冷却定子线圈时对其进行高精度建模（含有4000万个元素），我只能说，要了解电动汽车动力系统的开发，就必须学习大量的科学与工程知识。要知道，我们不能简单将电动汽车的电池与内燃机汽车的油箱相对应，也不能将电控和电机直接与内燃机汽车的发动机相对应，因为电动汽车的动力系统本身就是一个高度整合的复杂系统。

不过，为了避免冒犯其他领域的专家，我也需要承认，纯电动车的动力系统开发的确要比一款尖端内燃机动力系统简单一点，无论是在达到控制排放目标，还是其他方面。这点我还并不完全确定，但暂时可以这样说。不过，人类思维蕴含着无穷无尽的创造力，随着电动技术的不断成熟发展，未来的电动动力系统可能并不会比内燃机系统简单多少。我们现在就有几款设计，在未来1、2年内就会完全丰满起来，完全不需要几十年时间那么久。

Moseley的科学、技术、工程、数学（STEM）启蒙书籍之一。

SAE：未来的电池技术发展将遵循某种规律进行，还是可能会迎来一些“颠覆性”突破？

David：首先，我们要理解电池化学到底是怎么回事。简单来说，电池化学的基本原理就是将化学能转换为电能。自从我在6、7岁时读了科普读物《磁铁、灯泡和电池》（Magnets, Bulbs and Batteries），然后又拆了电池取出电极，并制造出我的第一个“柠檬电池”之后，我一直以为这就像是魔法。幸运的是，Lucid Motors拥有世界最顶级的电池技术团队，我们一直在与公司的电池供应商（三星SDI）紧密合作，共同为我们的各种需求定制最适合的电池。

坦白说，我本人接触电池研发的时间并不长，但即使是在这短短的一段时间内，我们的电池技术也已经实现了巨大的提升。在我看来，我们的电池供应商已经准备了大量优化方案，只要我们能够确定具体需求，并提供相关支持，他们就能快速实现电池优化。举个例子，与12个月前相比，我们的快充速度已经取得了200%的提升。因此，我有一种感觉，现在的一些所谓的“成熟技术”在很多方面都还存在继续优化的空间。

对于一些车型来说，锂离子电池已经初具成本竞争力。未来，锂电池还将成为更多车型的经济之选。但按照目前的成本下降趋势来说，全球仍有很多市场，是锂电池可能还很难深入进去的。然而，市场需求也将为锂离子电池技术的向前发展发挥巨大作用。按照目前的车辆排放水平，我们根本没办法在保证环保的前提下，满足日益增长的交通运输需求。所以在我看来，为了满足需求，人类的聪明才智与不断发展完善的电池化学技术一定会推动颠覆性电池技术的出现。

SAE：那驱动/牵引电机呢？我知道Lucid是独一无二的，但内部“定制”电机到底比其他电机厂商的成熟量产设计好在哪里呢？

David：Lucid Motors的目标从来就不是一定要专门搞什么定制设计。但我们坚信，Lucid的汽车极为与众不同，只有一款独一无二的电机才配得上它。的确，我们可能真的买不到一款完全符合我们要求的电机，但这并不是我们选择内部开发的唯一缘由。

首先，我们应该注意到电动动力系统具有高度集成的特点。电动推进技术与电机绕线设计，通常与逆变器中的电流水平，以及电池的化学原理、拓扑结构与机械设计紧密联系，而这又全部与车辆的热管理系统密不可分。第二，为了保证效率最大化，我们的变速器必须直接集成在电机内部。此外，为了保证乘客能拥有舒适的乘坐空间，车辆的一切部件都必须遵循严格的设计与安装流程。最后，由于目前电动汽车并不存在任何成熟的组件设计原则，大家对于功能的优化，甚至是系统的选择并没有达成统一的意见。

所以从一开始，Lucid就做出了清晰的战略选择：我们要亲自制造这辆车的每一个部分，包括电机。这意味着，我们必须召集所有相关领域的顶尖专家，并为他们提供一个完美的平台，让他们能够发挥各自的聪明才智，共同打造一个性能优、尺寸小且兼容性高的汽车系统。

这就是打造一辆顶级汽车的唯一方法。我们必须从基本原理入手，真正理解这些系统的优势与应用搭配。毫无疑问，这需要大量的学习及不断攀登的精神，但却能够让我们探索更多可能性、实现灵活设计，并真正发挥创新潜力。

通常来说，大家一听到“定制”总是会想到精致的晚礼服或西装，因此Lucid的“定制汽车”似乎也让人感觉有点夸夸其谈，不切实际。事实上，这只是我们公司CTO Peter Rawlinson的一个说法，代表Lucid公司将始终秉承以技术为本的原则，并深刻理解构成了我们独特卖点（USP - unique selling points）的所有系统。

SAE：对于以前的内燃机汽车工程师来说，现在转行开始进行电动汽车研发最大的挑战是什么？

David：从很大程度上说，电动汽车的研发与内燃机汽车是相同的，比如车辆底盘、白车身设计及车辆碰撞缓冲装置等。电动汽车设计能够带来新的机遇，但也同时带来了一些人们过去可能根本没有意识到的新挑战，大家可能经常很容易按照既有的思路工作。不过，他们的研发能力并没有丢掉。

很明显，我们的工程师也必须付出更大的努力，丰富自己在电动汽车设计方面的背景知识。比如，空调或热管理团队必须采用相应的系统策略，从车辆组件层面入手，探索更多的需求与潜力。不过，我认为这里面的基本原理并没有改变，而真正出现变化的地方可能将成为我们新的兴趣所在。

最大的变化还是在于动力系统中特定组件的设计，很显然电动系统与内燃机系统这两种核心动力系统之间存在巨大差异。然而，我真的认为这其中遵循的物理原理并不会改变，真正积极进取的工程师完全可以直面挑战，凭借自身的专业技能征战新的领域。此外，也许放下此前雄厚专业背景所带来的安全感，是对我们所有人最大的挑战。

也许在现实中，我们需要做出的最重要的决定在于是否要走出自己的“舒适圈”，在未知的电动汽车世界中开始新的冒险；还是继续走现在成熟厂商的老路子。或者我也可以这样问：你到底愿意承受多大风险，又想获得多少回报？我指的是智力而非财力方面的投入。

SAE：工程师们都梦想创造一套全新的开发流程。在Lucid公司，你是否有机会去尝试一些在其他公司没有可能的事情呢？

David：对我来说，在Lucid工作是一场非常美妙的经历。之前我从未有幸与这么多才华横溢的同事一起工作。在湾区，每个人都是这么生机勃勃，我在这里能够感受到一种特有的能量与希望。毫无疑问，亲眼见证一件产品在你的眼前一点点成型的感觉棒极了。

我们的工作很辛苦，也非常具有挑战性，但当我们看到自己的第一辆原型车完成首次转向时，这就像是见证新生儿的诞生一样充满喜悦、激动人心。我坚信，无论从任何角度来说，Lucid Air都绝对称得上一辆卓越的汽车。未来，我们还有大量的工作要做，但我还是一有机会就立刻掏钱订了一辆我们公司的Lucid Air。现在，我已经迫不及待要开着我的Lucid兜风了。

As Director, Powertrain, CAE Crash & Safety for electric-vehicle startup Lucid Motors, David Moseley may hold one of the most intriguing—and possibly even most-envied—jobs in the auto industry. Leading up to his SAE WCX17 Leadership Summit panel discussion, “How, What and if You Will Drive in the Next Decade,” Moseley discussed the not-really-so-different aspects of EV and internal-combustion engineering, why a powertrain’s still just a powertrain—and why he ponied up his own money for a deposit on Lucid’s Air electric luxury sedan.

Should the auto industry step away from the term “powertrain” and shift to “propulsion” as the march toward electrification continues?

I’m happy to keep calling it a powertrain–as far as I am concerned it’s just the sequence of energy transformations from source to tractive effort, whether ICE, fuel cell, battery/motor or [Star] Trek-y warp-drive. I don’t think we need a unique term for each manner by which this is achieved. What I positively like about the term “powertrain” in this context is the picture it generates in my mind of a line of carriages, a sequence of matched components working in harmony to deliver passengers to their destinations.

We’re always intrigued by discussion of the parts-count delta between IC vehicles and EVs. Does this meaningfully ease the product-development and bill-of-materials processes?

In truth, it probably only serves to make the ambition of creating both a car and a car company barely feasible for a startup—rather than utterly insane!

More seriously, this goes to the heart of how one develops a product as complex as a car in the context of a startup company. The big picture is that you don’t need all that many people and you need to scale their number progressively as the vehicle design develops. Too many people, too soon, perversely acts as a brake on progress: tentacles of premature design begin to grow, which are hard to sever and begin to limit the design. And there is no formalized product development process on Day Zero, but you can aspire to means of cooperation, ways of working, even office layout, that in a young organization can provide the structure that a formal product-development process provides in a mature company. All this is genuinely both the luxury and necessity of starting from scratch.

I suppose you could say that a mature organization can make good use of a wider range of engineering skills effectively, as systems and precedents are available to enable a wider range of people to contribute. Without these protections, a small company like Lucid is more dependent on the excellence of its individual engineers.

Understanding and managing these issues well ends up being far, far more important than the parts-count difference in the vehicle between ICE and EV.

Without direct emissions, is the broad task of achieving the full range of regulatory certifications for an EV considerably less complicated?

I’m not really able to quantify where the balance of complexity between the ICE and BEV systems will eventually lie as EV technology matures. I can promise you that we’ve faced some pretty deep challenges and deployed some sophisticated methods. Whether its 3D X-ray tomography of an individual lithium ion cell as it fast-charges, or a 40-million-element model of a fine oil mist as it cools a stator end-winding, there is an enormous amount to learn and significant science and engineering in developing an understanding of EV powertrain development. Remember that there is no simple mapping between battery/fuel tank and controller-motor/engine—an EV powertrain is a very integrated and sophisticated system.

So I am prepared to admit, if it salves anyone’s pride, that it’s easier to develop a new BEV powertrain than it is a cutting-edge ICE powertrain, whether for emissions targets or other attributes. I’m not completely sure this is true—but whatever. However, the human mind is enormously creative; as this technology matures, there is plenty of scope for electric powertrains to become every bit as complex as ICE technology. We have designs under development that I can promise you will put flesh on those bones within one or two years, let alone decades.

Regarding the current state of battery development, should we expect a “mature” kind of development timeline for the foreseeable future, or a potential “game-changer” chemistry or other breakthrough?

Well, first of all there is cell chemistry. This is the starting point: transforming chemical to electrical energy. Since reading the Ladybird book of “Magnets, Bulbs and Batteries” at the age of six or seven, and tearing open a battery to extract an anode and cathode to insert in a juicy lemon, I’ve always thought of this as something like witchcraft. Fortunately, Lucid has a world-class cell-technology team that works in partnership with our cell suppliers [Samsung SDI] to develop the range of attributes that Lucid is looking for with each application.

Even in the relatively short time that I have been involved with this process, I have seen how much progress has been made in the cells available to us. It seems to me that our cell-supply partners have a range of incremental ideas available and as soon as we were able to offer consistent direction and support, they rapidly produced improvements. For example, in fast-charge resilience we have seen a 200% gain when compared with the position 12 months ago. So I have a sense that there is plenty of scope for improvement in that “mature technology” sense.

There are classes of vehicles for which lithium-ion batteries are competitive and the spread of these classes is growing. But there remain many markets which are difficult to penetrate with current or reasonably-projectable costs. However, there also is an enormous gradient of demand to pull new technologies forward—it is simply not environmentally possible to satisfy the growing demand for transportation based on the personal oxidation of hydrocarbons. So it seems very likely to me that human ingenuity and the rich varieties of available chemistries will yield disruptive cells in response to this demand gradient.

What about drive/traction motors? Lucid’s are proprietary, I understand. What might make a “bespoke” motor design better than something already developed and in production from a motor manufacturer?

In Lucid’s case, it’s never been about acquiring a bespoke design, in the sense of believing that our vehicle is so very different from any other that only a uniquely-designed motor will do. It is certainly true that we could not buy a motor like our own, but that is not the philosophical justification for developing an in-house unit.

First, we should note how closely-integrated the whole EV powertrain system must be. The technology and winding of the motor is very much linked to the current levels in the inverter and the cell technology, topology and mechanical design of the battery—which all is tightly linked to the thermal management of the vehicle. Then the mechanical design of the transmission must be integrated with that of the motor for maximum efficiency. And everything must be tightly packaged and tuned for installation in the vehicle to serve the space experience of the passengers. Finally, none of the design principles of any of these components are yet matured in their automotive applications to the point where there is anything like a consensus on their optimal features, or even an accepted genealogy of options.

So from the outset, Lucid made a strategic decision that we would design every part of this critical sequence of items—including the motors—in house. This meant investing in truly world-class experts in each and every domain and providing them with the latitude to create together a single system with every component designed with regard to performance, system compatibility and vehicle packaging.

This is the only way to achieve a best-in-class vehicle. We need to really understand from first principles how these systems excel and combine. It has given us an enormous mountain of learning to climb and there are still further Everests of knowledge beyond. But our reward is a deep understanding of what is possible and an enormous design flexibility and potential for innovation.

So describing our motor as “bespoke,” as one might label a ball gown or Italian suit, makes Lucid’s decision sound like a vanity or frivolous option. In reality, it’s an expression of our CTO’s [Peter Rawlinson] vision that our company will be technology-driven and develop a profound understanding of all the systems that define our USPs [unique selling points].

What might be the most significant challenge for an engineer with a work history in IC vehicles to switch to EV engineering?

A wide proportion of the specific engineering skills are identical: in chassis or body-in-white design. In restraints development or vehicle crash structures. EV engineering unlocks new opportunities and presents new challenges that you may not recognize and it’s all too easy to continue with outdated assumptions. But the skills themselves remain directly applicable.

It’s obviously true that some skills must morph further to fit—the HVAC or thermal team will have new system strategies to consider and different expectations from the vehicle components. It’s still the same physics and I presume that the changes would be a new source of interest.

The biggest change is really in the design of the specific components of the powertrain itself. There is clearly a huge difference in this core technology set. I really, truly believe that it is all physics and a motivated and competent engineer can pick up the challenge of moving to a new discipline even in these areas. Letting go of the security that we feel we have by virtue of our established expertise becomes the biggest challenge for all of us.

Perhaps in reality, the biggest shift required is whether to step out into the world of the new EV startups to learn this technology, or whether to bet on the growing in-house expertise of the established OEMs. That’s more a question of your appetite for risk and reward—and I am talking about the intellectual rather than the financial opportunity.

Engineers dream of creating clean-sheet development processes. Have you at Lucid been able to do something perhaps you always wanted to do at previous companies but never had the opportunity?

For me, Lucid has been a fantastic experience. I have never previously had the privilege of working with the extraordinarily-concentrated pool of talent that Lucid has acquired. There is somehow an energy and expectation peculiar to the [San Francisco] Bay Area that creates a buzz about life and work. And absolutely, seeing a product growing before your eyes is quite extraordinary. It’s enormously hard work.

But seeing the first alpha vehicle turn its wheels for the first time is an experience akin to giving birth. I really believe the Lucid Air is extraordinary in absolute terms, from any organization. There still is a great deal of work to do. But as soon as I had the opportunity to place my own deposit I took it – and I can’t wait to drive my own Lucid!

Author: Bill Visnic
Source: SAE Automotive Engineering Magazine