50 replies to this topic

[B.P.]

Jez, on Apr 24 2008, 04:43 PM, said:

And then Ferrari go and say this- Ferrari Critical of Kers

Oohhhh, looks like the mighty Ferrari haven't come to grips with the new system........

[Eric]

B.P., on Apr 25 2008, 06:04 AM, said:

Oohhhh, looks like the mighty Ferrari haven't come to grips with the new system........

Basically.

It's worth a shot, in my opinion.  Something needs to change, so I'm all for experimenting around with things.  It'd be hard to get any worse...

[aussief1]

Williams F1 buy a Kenetic Energy Research company. Smart move Frank, smart move. However I should imagine Williams will have a good amount of information flow from the extensive research Toyota would have carried out in this area.

Anyway here is the article:

Williams F1 has acquired a company called Automotive Hybrid Power Ltd, which was established at the end of 2006 in order to look at the technologies involved in the planned Kinetic Energy Recovery System which will be introduced in F1 next year. AHP has now become Williams Hybrid Power and its founder Ian Foley has moved his operations from Norwich to Grove.

Foley is high-powered engineer, who was working for Benetton in Formula 1 in the late 1980s. He then went to Team Lotus where he was head of research and development under Peter Wright. One of his junior employees at the time was Sam Michael, now technical director of Williams. After the collapse of Lotus in 1995 Foley went on to develop cars with the Lotus GT team, which employed Jan Lammers, amongst others. For a period Foley dropped out of racing and concentrated on property development but was then lured back by Lammers to run the technical side of the Racing for Holland sports car team, winning FIA titles in 2002 and 2003.

Since the team dropped out of sports car racing and went to A1GP instead, Foley decided to involve himself in other projects, notably KERS but also a system to accurately measure the speed of trains. The team believes that Foley's research will give then a head start in the race to get the most effective KERS system.

Source: http://www.totalf1.c...joins_Williams/

[rodders47]

thanks AussieF1 I read that article also and is interesting! Like how do you make a "Lightweight Flywheeel" and then make it spin at 100,000rpm and produce power ??

has got my interest :-)

[DOF_power]

Q: (Livio Oricchio – O Estado de Sao Paulo) Kubica, the driver's weight is very important this year, but it will be even more important next year with the change in the technical regulations. Are you worried about it, and is there any pressure from the GPDA to increase the minimum weight of the car?

RK: Yeah, but changing the regulations, adding KERS, the cars will get much heavier and already now, in BMW Sauber's case, there was clearly an advantage to weigh less than what I was weighing at the beginning of the season, so we made an effort in the workshop, the guys did a big effort to reduce the weight of the car, I reduced my weight and we came to a good result, but next year, adding KERS which will weigh around 35 kilos – more or less – it will become very, very important to be light or to have a light car, and to have a light car will cost the teams a lot of money to reduce the weight. It will maybe even be more dangerous because the parts will be lighter and more fragile and I'm worried that some teams will chose light drivers because it's more advantageous. I don't think this is the way to go. I've put my views to the FIA, also the GPDA, but I think their answer was quite negative, but we will see.

[Argento Reloaded]

The engine flywheel is a KER subsystem inside the diesel or otto engine.

[Rainmaster]

Here's an article from Autosport on the subject, I'm paying for this, so I hate to let you all read it for free.

Quote

To KERS or not to KERS

    To KERS or not to KERS: that seems to be the question facing teams  as they move towards freezing the specifications of their 2009 designs  in order to get on with the cars' building and testing.

    For a while now it has been acknowledged - if not by the sport's  governing body, the FIA, then certainly by engineers charged with  making the technology race-worthy - that the introduction of kinetic  energy recovery systems in motorsport's top formula is more a sop to  the need to be seen to be green than an earnest attempt at harnessing  the energy produced by racing cars in 'off-gas' situations.

    That said, there exists little doubt that the mere fact that the technology is optional  from 2009 onwards - despite having been banned earlier this century  when McLaren intended to introduce it - will result in massive advances  in their mass and dimensions, with obvious benefits for road car  applications.

        A proposed KERS system © Flybrid    However, some of Formula One's engineers, particularly those from  companies already incorporating a form of KERS in their road car  ranges, are lamenting the relative crudity of the systems, with some  suggesting that energy recovery in F1 cars could be as little as 20% of  potential.

    This is substantially below that harvested by production systems as  already fitted to vehicles such as the Toyota Prius and Honda's Civic  Hybrid, which are said to feed up to 50% back into their power trains.  Others fail to understand why only the two rear wheels may recover  energy when an F1 car, by definition, has double that number.

    At this juncture it is important to note that the FIA has left the  choice of energy recovery systems open - thus batteries and capacitors  can be charged by either flywheels or generators, or flywheels could be  used to feed stored power back into power trains via constantly  variable transmissions, such as the Flybrid system.

    It is also important to note that the FIA recently circulated  proposals to ramp up KERS over the next four years - but, somewhat  understandably, the teams have spurned such suggestions on the logical  basis that they would rather fully understand KERS in its crudest form  before getting into development commitments. And, there is plenty to  understand...

    However, apart from the question of technology, there is the  question of cost: rumours doing the rounds in the Montreal paddock  suggested that the lithium batteries which would appear to offer the  most effective (note: not efficient) method of storage but cost upwards  of £200,000 GB ($400,000 USD) per installation, have, like engines,  limited duty cycles when operating at maximum output.

    And what else but peak performance does F1 seek at all times? Thus,  there is little doubt that teams will optimise their lithium batteries,  which would appear to be the preferred storage method amongst at least  90% of the teams at this point, to deliver peak performance over a  two-hour race, and no more - and yes, you've guessed it, throw them  away afterwards!

    Toyota F1 General Manager (Engine) Luca Marmorini admitted that this  was the most likely scenario, saying that he "won't be surprised at the  cost estimate", then agreeing that they are likely to be thrown away  after every race.

    "I'm not a chemical engineer, but I doubt very much that once you  have stressed such a battery in a race that you will be inclined to use  it in the next race," he told autosport.com in Canada.

        Toyota Senior General Manager Engine Luca Mamorini © LAT    Force India's Mike Gascoyne, though, hopes "the duty cycle will be  at least a couple of races," but even on the basis of that  (optimistic?) assumption, teams will be in for £100,000 per car per  race - adding at least £4m to their budgets for a 20-season race, which  according to all indications will be the case in future.

    So, whatever was saved in the long run by the engine freeze - which  the FIA now seems intent on reversing if the reasons for the calling of  a (ultimately postponed) meeting of Technical Directors in Monaco are  to be believed - could be consumed by stocks of throw-away batteries  which release 60 kW for six seconds every lap - or about 0.4  seconds/lap on the average circuit according to Gascoyne.

    As for 'throw-away', that could be too loose a term, for no race  promoter wishes to have a half-tonne pile of batteries littering his  paddock after F1 leaves town, so the teams will likely be forced to  take them back to their respective bases for disposal by burning - at  which point the batteries allegedly produce pure, unadulterated arsenic.

    "Throwing away those types of batteries is not the most  environmentally friendly thing you can do," said Gascoyne in Montreal.  He would, though, not be drawn on the arsenic angle, save to say,  "Well, it depends on the type of battery used, but obviously we're  using fairly complex stuff for batteries, so yeah..."

    'Fly-away' races will present even more of a challenge: will teams  be permitted to dump their batteries in host countries, or will they  each be required to fly no less than 100 kilograms of lithium batteries  - two per car, including a spare - to and from races? Again, neither  option seems particularly responsible, which is, after all, what KERS  is intended to be.

    But, green or not, battery costs are not the only economic  consideration: with the FIA refusing to increase minimum car weight  from the present 605kg with driver, and with KERS, regardless of system  thus eating into ballast weights, or even pushing total weight beyond  the regulatory minimum, the pressure is on teams to reduce the weight  of 2009 designs to compensate. And, weight saving costs big money.

    Teams will obviously aim to position the various constituent parts  of KERS, which most agree will carry a penalty of 25 - 30 kg, as low  and as close to the centre of the car as possible in order to minimise  balance disruptions, and the obvious place to position batteries is  under the fuel tank...

    Honda team principal Ross Brawn admits this could be an issue,  although he believes the sport is able to manage the risks. "I think  the safety aspects of KERS do need careful consideration, and I think  the teams and the FIA are doing that and it is one of the areas where  everybody is co-operating to find solutions.

        Ross Brawn © LAT    "Safety is of concern to all of us, and none of us want the  competitive element of Formula One to get in the way of safety  considerations," he reiterated when talking to autosport.com at the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve.

    "But we shouldn't forget that we still have 70 or 80 kilogrammes of  fuel in the car and we have managed to handle that safely," the  technical and strategic genius said before conceding that it took the  sport an awful long time to manage fire risks. "I hope we have advanced  somewhat, and people back then were prepared to accept that there was a  certain risk element; we're not prepared to that any more so I think  KERS won't be allowed unless we solve the safety problems."

    Here teams face a quandary, for no safety procedures have yet been  framed by the FIA, which has, according to Marmorini, delegated safety  to teams. "It's completely up to the teams, so the FIA will inspect the  Failure Mode and Analysis of every team to see if the system they use  is safe enough, but the FIA will not be responsible for the safety, so  it is completely up to the teams. So it's difficult..."

    Safety is a concern even where flywheels are the energy recovery  method of choice, for there is the obvious hazard of 10 kilogram carbon  fibre flywheels spinning at up to 60 000 rpm. Whilst crash tests under  controlled conditions prove flywheels can be contained, race conditions  are everything but controlled.

    Then there is the technical complexity and the risk of ever more  items to go wrong, go wrong, go wrong. According to Brawn one of the  biggest challenges facing engineers, apart from, of course, the weight  penalty, is the control of brake proportion on the rear wheels.

    "KERS is driven through the rear axle under braking," he explained,  "and once you've saturated the storage device to the permitted level  then obviously the torque through the rear axle can change. That is  potentially a tricky thing for the teams to manage, so the gain is  maybe two or three tenths of a second, and the loss is the ballast or  weight, and the packaging and the issue of torque management of the  rear axle. It's far from slam-dunk, as they say..."

    Which led to the obvious question: Have you considered running without KERS next year?

    "I think every team is going to cover both options, because none of  us today know how good KERS is or is going to become. It will take a  while before we are able to overcome the disadvantages and there may be  different iterations and versions of KERS, and maybe there are other  technical solutions. That is what everybody is working towards."

    A Toyota source also admitted the team had taken a policy decision  of running KERS only where it provided a clear lap time advantage.  "Yes, we discussed it, and were clear on the matter - if our cars are  not markedly faster with KERS than without, then we won't run it."

        Toyota Hybrid Concept Car at the 77th International Motor Show in Geneva © XPB    Despite the fact that Toyota is the planet's largest manufacturer of hybrid cars?

    "Yes, don't forget we also have conventional cars in our range..." was the spontaneous response.

    Thus, Honda - saliently not only the only team to embrace a 'green'  theme and livery for its Formula One programme], but also the first  volume manufacturer to produce a hybrid - and Toyota as the most  visible maker of such road car technology are deliberating KERS  technology with just five months to go before testing for 2009 gets  under way

    BMW, the other manufacturer in Formula One with perceived ecological  credentials, has to date concentrated on alternate fuels - with diesel  and hydrogen power being the main beneficiaries of this research, but  seems to be totally committed to KERS. However, Professor Burkhard  Goeschel - its former director for development - played a major role  with FIA president Max Mosley in suggesting the concept, so, just maybe  it is a case of they would go that route, wouldn't they. What, though,  if KERS turns out to be slower?

    So, with two of three manufacturers still evaluating whether to run  with KERS, one seemingly committed to alternate fuels, and the rest -  apart from Williams, who have made a tradition of ploughing a lone  furrow and have thus bought into a hybrid energy recovery company -  having campaigned for a postponement in its introduction during a team  bosses' meeting during the Spanish Grand Prix , what chance less than  half the field actually racing with KERS at the 2009 season opener?

    As Brawn says, KERS in 2009 is far from 'slam-dunk'...

Basically, KERS suck.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Rainmaster, on Jun 19 2008, 11:42 PM, said:

Basically, KERS suck.

FIA are a bunch of wan KERS

[Rainmaster]

Meanioni, on Jun 19 2008, 11:53 PM, said:

FIA are a bunch of wan KERS

[DOF_power]

As I've always said, a a twin-turbo V10 running one hydrogen would be just fine.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Meanioni, on Jun 19 2008, 11:53 PM, said:

FIA are a bunch of wan KERS

And that was my 1,000th post.... was hoping to save that for something, erudite, witty, full of insight... ah well why change the habit of a lifetime?

[Prodigy]

HandyNZL, on Apr 16 2008, 03:33 AM, said:

Should be investigating hydrogen cars running off water, not frigging low percentage power from braking...stupid FIA...

KERS is a huge advancement in technology, for years scientists have been unable to apply this idea to cars or other machines.  This would be huge for formula 1, but more importantly for the everyday driver people use to get to work.  Everytime a person brakes a large amount of energy (money) is lost.  This would also greatly reduce pollution if used in everyday cars.  

I think F1 has the right idea here, and I would definitely like to see K.E.R.S. a part of the 2009 season.

[Eric 2]

Prodigy, on Aug 11 2008, 01:59 PM, said:

KERS is a huge advancement in technology, for years scientists have been unable to apply this idea to cars or other machines.  This would be huge for formula 1, but more importantly for the everyday driver people use to get to work.  Everytime a person brakes a large amount of energy (money) is lost.  This would also greatly reduce pollution if used in everyday cars.  

I think F1 has the right idea here, and I would definitely like to see K.E.R.S. a part of the 2009 season.

I agree.  Gas mileage will be better with KERS.  The only cars selling in the American market right now are the Honda Civic and the Honda Fit.  Both get around 35 highway mpg.  Which, for America, is quite good.  (The California emissions standards mean you have to have all this heavy s##t on your car to reduce emissions, and therefore it kills fuel economy.  That's why the new 67 mpg Ford Fiesta isn't coming here).

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Just thinking a 20Kg flywheel spinning at 60,000rpm is going to have a gyroscopic effect on the car - i.e. when turning the car there will be a resisting force from the flywheel. Surely this will have an effect on both the way in which it is mounted and also on the stability of the car???

[Boily]

OKOK how does KERS help the teams save money ?

[Rainmaster]

Boily, on Aug 18 2008, 02:01 PM, said:

OKOK how does KERS help the teams save money ?

It doesn't, and it isn't 'green' either.

[monza gorilla]

No it isn't. But it is interesting. Hypnodisc!

[Jean Todt]

Looks like Williams have found someone to pick their Tech.....

http://www.worldcarf...ystem-developed

The flywheel-based KERS system developed by Williams for formula one will instead be fitted to Porsche's new 911 GT3 R Hybrid race car.

The Grove based team told the media on Thursday that its energy recovery system, developed throughout 2009 but disallowed as part of a FOTA agreement this year, will be unveiled in the Porsche at the Geneva Motor Show next month.

"We hope that this will be just the start of the evolution of hybrid systems developed for formula one moving across to applications where they can contribute to cleaner and more powerful vehicles," said Williams' chief operating officer Alex Burns.

Williams said the technology will also be available to buses, trains, ships and wind power generation.

Aboard the Porsche 911, however, Williams' KERS will see some racing action, with the German carmaker announcing it will contest May's Nurburgring 24 hour race.

[DOF_power]

Until the current formula won't be thrown away, there won't be any hope for relevancy in F1.

As much as I dislike the Delta Wing IRL concept, it does have its points: ground-effects, turbos, active differentials, non-stressed engine and gearbox layout and such.

[Max Mosley]

Yeah I like the Delta Wing concept too.  Innovation from an almost spec series!

[DOF_power]

Max Mosley, on 14 February 2010 - 02:28 PM, said:

Yeah I like the Delta Wing concept too. Innovation from an almost spec series!

The Delta Wing is not a spec-car, it's an open-source racecar, witch also support multiple power plants and transmission configurations.