# Formula 1 according to Ripperton



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

But then again the extremely long header pipes leave even more suspicion and suggest to me that the WERS wont be using a turbine at all.
All turbo engineers know that headers need to be as short as possible to extract the most gain from combustion escaping from the cylinder.
This is where the V6 arrangement comes into play. 
The shortest header pipe is no header pipe at all so the middle cylinder of each bank of 3 cylinders will receive the exhaust alternately from each cylinder either side of it through ports not headers.
Once the middle cylinder has dealt with the still expanding gasses from its neighbors, it will then exhaust the finally spent gasses into a header pipe.
So the V6 will have only one header pipe on each head coming from the middle cylinder.
Wont see much more power from this engine but the fuel economy will be amazing.


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2013/12/15355.html

3rd paragraph down
Almost a bullseye
they have put a generator on the turbo but they are keeping the air compressor.
Didnt think they had the power to run both


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

So they expect to get 350kW just from the exhaust gas energy with that WERS system..??
Can anyone explain the thermodynamics of that process ??


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

in very highly charged engines exhaust pressures will be greater then the boost . It can be taken to extreams , turning the engine into a compressor dumping all the power to the turbo thus stalling the engine . Higher exhaust pressures then intake seams wrong ! but the valves make it not back up into the intake .


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

But it is suggested that these engines are already releasing much og their exhaust pressure by sequential cylinder charging.
There will still be a residual amount of pressure, heat and kinetic, energy in the exhaust...but 350 kW ??


----------



## dougingraham (Jul 26, 2011)

Karter2 said:


> But it is suggested that these engines are already releasing much og their exhaust pressure by sequential cylinder charging.
> There will still be a residual amount of pressure, heat and kinetic, energy in the exhaust...but 350 kW ??


350kw is only a tiny portion of the waste when converting liquid fuels like alcohol or gasoline to kinetic energy. When operating efficiently about one hp makes it to the wheels for 7 hp of energy discarded as waste. In high performance motors this ratio is a lot worse. 350kw is the waste from only 67 hp generated. There is a lot of waste, the problem is converting it back to something useful.


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Heres your worst case scenario.
The flames your seeing is escaped combustion.










At anything above idle rpm the exhaust valve opens DURING combustion not after its finished. As an apprentice Motor Mechanic I was taught a turbo was driven by the spent exhaust gas being pushed out by the piston on the exhaust stroke. Its physically impossible to get something from nothing. Spent exhaust gas has no energy value and its volume is a 10th of the air fuel that was inducted into the cylinder.
The funny thing is what your seeing in the photo above is also happening your car and even in your lawn mower ! 2 stroke or 4 stroke.

I think its awesome that the Formula One community is actually addressing the waste energy issue. The Oil Industry must be writhing.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

I understand there is a lot of waste energy potentially available, but my question is how is it they can suddenly now recover that energy using a "simple" exhaust turbine.
It just seem such a major leap forward in thermal efficiency that its hard to believe no one has even a small step in that direction before.??


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> I understand there is a lot of waste energy potentially available, but my question is how is it they can suddenly now recover that energy using a "simple" exhaust turbine.
> It just seem such a major leap forward in thermal efficiency that its hard to believe no one has even a small step in that direction before.??





dougingraham said:


> ...*350kw is the waste from only 67 hp generated*...


The engines produce 700-800hp or better. Also 350kw, over what period of time? If it's used like KERS, they're capturing and storing energy over a period of time, then strategically using it to pass, then back to saving up...


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

it's turning the engine into the compressor and combustion chamber of a jet engine . The turbo/generator side is the power generating side of turbine engine .You could absorb all the power in the turbo if the pressure went high enough . the limitation is how much heat / pressure can everything take. 
Let's say 150 psi (exhaust side) will consume all the crankshaft power almost stalling the engine . All power is going to the turbine section (3 stage turbo).


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

toddshotrods said:


> ... 350kw, over what period of time? If it's used like KERS, they're capturing and storing energy over a period of time, then strategically using it to pass, then back to saving up...


 Ahh !, yes, now that would make more sense.
It would be advantageous to be able to use the "Electrical" drive to spread the power peak out over the rev range.

I was still working with Rip's original suggestion of direct coupling of the generator and motor..


> ...The turbo's compressor will be replaced with a 3 phase generator directly powering a motor on the crankshaft. Just 3 cables no controller or batteries....


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

some power to the crank and some to the turbos give 4 stages of power recovery . helps efficiency.


----------



## Frank (Dec 6, 2008)

350 kW was ripperton's estimate also, wasn't it? They're talking 160 hp (120 kW) for 33 second per lap in the original link. This is very interesting!


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

It not clear exactly what the details are.
The second link suggests the "KER's" ( front wheel ??) motors will be double the output of this years system at 160bhp, with the "WER's" ( exhaust recovery) system adding even more charge to the battery presumably able to be used by either the ??kW hybrid rear drive ( as this year), the front drive, and also to drive the turbocharger for extra boost when needed ??
But with only 25kg of battery (Supercaps ?) to play with, that limits the total energy available per lap.
Very complex, this is becoming much more a "software" race formula.

EDIT: .. Actually, ..other than Rip'tns "2016 crystal ball", .. i cant see any suggestion that the KER's system will be moved to the front wheels, infact there is a statement that says...
.


> To compensate for the extra power being generated under braking by ERS, teams will be allowed to use an electronic rear brake control system.


 So likely the 2014 KERS is just a enhanced version of the 2013 rear system ?


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Ripper'tn,.. i can understand the logic of moving the KERS to the front wheels, but i am pretty sure that 4WD is a no go zone ( just like auto gearshift, ABS, etc) for F1 designers.
Do you have any other sources that suggest/support your thinking that FWD/KERS could be a reality in F1 in the near future ( 2016) ??


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Karter2 said:


> Ripper'tn,.. i can understand the logic of moving the KERS to the front wheels, but i am pretty sure that 4WD is a no go zone ( just like auto gearshift, ABS, etc) for F1 designers.
> Do you have any other sources that suggest/support your thinking that FWD/KERS could be a reality in F1 in the near future ( 2016) ??


4WD F1 is just my mad ramblings at this stage.
The logic is to have more rubber to road transmitting engine power and brake power (both friction and regen).
Before KERS the rear tires were doing a lot more work that the front.
With about 55 front / 45 rear friction brake bias the rears are doing almost as much brake work as the fronts AND they were dealing with 100% of the engine power under accel.
With KERS you arnt actually placing more braking load on the rears but you are putting more drive energy (80bhp then and 160bhp now) through the rears.
All these changes F1 is going through now are placing more and more loads on the rear tires.
They will need to do more load sharing if they want to stop tires exploding in race.


----------



## liveforphysics (Jan 16, 2014)

Ripperton- I hate to burst your bubble my friend, but we've got nothing remotely close to 350kW of shaft power from the exhaust turbine. In fact, it's closer to being an order of magnitude too high. 

The reason the turbo can contribute to making an extra 350kW is due to using the relatively small amount of shaft energy collected from the turbine to drive the compressor wheel to feed large amounts of additional air into the engine which can then burn more fuel and make an extra 350kW. The shaft power is never more than 100 even in the largest turbo drag cars (4 digit HP values) I ever worked with.

They also aren't leaving fatigue budget for front tire loading on the table unused. If someone was, they wouldn't be competitive.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

RIPPERTON said:


> They will need to do more load sharing if they want to stop tires exploding in race.


 ..OR the tyres have to be made tougher ( heavier ?) to cope with the increased loading, instead of being so marginal with existing loads. !

(.. notice how the tyres on race trucks stand up to 2000+hp and 5 tonnes of weight !)


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

liveforphysics said:


> Ripperton- I hate to burst your bubble my friend,
> The reason the turbo can contribute to making an extra 350kW is due to using the relatively small amount of shaft energy collected from the turbine to drive the compressor wheel to feed large amounts of additional air into the engine which can then burn more fuel and make an extra 350kW. The shaft power is never more than 100 even in the largest turbo drag cars (4 digit HP values) I ever worked with.


Dont flatter yourself Luke, Im not the type of person that has "bubbles"  
I should have warned that my OP figures were rough as people seem to have taken them quite literally and overlooked the more important fact that I got the turbo generator part right.
I can see with your Turbo drag car mindset you dont really understand where these F1 boys are today. They are going for fuel economy not straight out shaft snapping, energy wasting horse power.
I bet now, they are running only a fraction of the boost pressures that they were running in the Senna years.


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

http://www.gizmag.com/formula-one-new-hybrid-tech/30560/

Read this right to the bottom, It just gets better
MGU-H = Motor Generator Unit - Heat (connected to turbo)
MGU-K = Motor Generator Unit - Kinetic (connected to crankshaft)
Like I thought the MGU-H does actually drive the MGU-K directly and also charges the battery. 

The MGU-H's yield is not part of the 2 megajoule per lap KERS equation, it just goes flat out whenever the driver has his foot on the throttle.

At low rpm when you would normally have turbo lag the MGU-H actually drives the turbo impeller to pre boost the V6's inlet !!!!!!!!!!


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Kers can release 4MJ per lap but can only harvest 2MJ per lap....
meaning a driver can carry 2MJ energy from the second last lap for example into the last lap where he harvests another 2MJ in the first half of the lap then uses 4MJ in the last half of the lap...for the win


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

noise....
http://www.renaultsport.com/Come-on-feel-the-noise,2630.html?lang=fr


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

> I bet now, they are running only a fraction of the boost pressures that they were running in the Senna years.


Wrong !!! 3.5 Bar
3.8 Bar in race in 1988

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/06/21/renault-reveals-2014-f1-engine/


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

RIPPERTON said:


> ...At low rpm when you would normally have turbo lag the MGU-H actually drives the turbo impeller to pre boost the V6's inlet !!!!!!!!!!


And, something I found very interesting, is it can also slow the turbo down, functioning like a waste gate. That's incredible electronic control over both sides of boost, which is sure to filter down to the street, for ICE guys. For us, it bring things a step closer, making people more familiar/more comfortable with electric drive, and showing its awesome potential for precision control.


I also like that an increasing amount of their total available power is coming from electric, and they have to use it wisely in the actual race - that also plays right into familiarizing people with electric drive and how to use it effectively. Imagine young wannabes (safely, of course) imitating racers, practicing getting the best combination of power and range from their drivers.


----------



## liveforphysics (Jan 16, 2014)

RIPPERTON said:


> Dont flatter yourself Luke, Im not the type of person that has "bubbles"
> I should have warned that my OP figures were rough as people seem to have taken them quite literally and overlooked the more important fact that I got the turbo generator part right.


lol my friend.  Some of us have had awareness of exhaust driven turbine generators for the last decade, as well as made our own scratch-built electric supercharger systems rather than just posting about them like it's something revolutionary F1 conceived of doing. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_turbocharger

This is my electric SC from my own racecar (which I haven't bothered to even start for the last year or so because ICE stuff is so lame, even when it's fast enough to shit on supercars in the quarter mile). 











RIPPERTON said:


> I can see with your Turbo drag car mindset you dont really understand where these F1 boys are today. They are going for fuel economy not straight out shaft snapping, energy wasting horse power.
> I bet now, they are running only a fraction of the boost pressures that they were running in the Senna years.


Nope, they will run whatever the maximum boost they are permitted to run, it would be impossible to be competitive otherwise. I no longer have a turbo-drag-car mentality either, I switched to a nitrous+supercharger mentality years ago, and then more recently lost interest in that game in favor of pure electric drive-trains exclusively. 

An F1 team is always going to do whatever makes the car accelerate as hard as possible for the fuel allotted, because if you leave anything on the table and someone else doesn't, you won't be competitive. 


An element of engine performance you may be underestimating is the criticality of the exhaust pressure ratio to intake pressure ratios during IVO/EVO over-lap phases. This is why you don't see tiny short turbine manifolding as you suggested, but longer tubes leveraging resonance pulse timing and merge collector designs to minimize exhaust pressures through pulse scavenging on the other cylinders. This minimizes intake path reversion and avoids power/BSFC destroying exhaust gas contamination in your new intake mixture and ensures improved intake mixture cylinder fill. 

If you try to drive an engine that is having meaningful energy extraction from the exhaust in the form of a turbine while not balancing that additional exhaust pressure with balanced inlet pressure, you end up with a very poor BSFC low performance engine.

Lastly, the photo of the Nitromethane flames is a bit of an exceptional circumstance, as the A/F ratios are selected not because they are remotely capable of stoichiometric combustion, but rather to fine tune compression by having the capability to easily vary non-compressible fuel volume in the chamber, with a second function being simply evaporative cooling of the intake and exhaust valves. Nitromethane carries it's own partial Oxygen source in it's own molecule and in a top fuel dragster operates largely in this partial/incomplete first decomposition combustion mode while the fuel is in the chamber. It only gets the O2 to complete the second-half of combustion after it's left the header and the very hot partially combusted fuel species make those beautiful flames you see in the photo. 

In a properly tuned and efficient engine, the energy lost through exhaust is still huge, but not nearly as high of enthalpy delta relative to ambient to enable a turbine to harvest a high percentage of it without incurring stiff penalties on the IM/EM pressure ratios that cripple ICE performance. 

In other words, electric motor coupled turbines are cool, and have neat features and certainly can improve system efficiency and performance in meaningful ways (I love the lack of need for waste-gates and useful energy recovery). Sadly though, they are nothing like a continuous magical source of hundreds of kW's of no-penalty power adding that I think someone reading your posts in this thread may be inclined to believe. 

I do think it's a nice direction for F1 to head. The racing I've got passion for watching are the all electric formula cars.  Woot!


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Well, first race of the new F1 regulation season done .....
..and i suspect the reigning World F1 champion,..Seb Vetel.. is not a big fan of the changes !..nor will several others be.
Only a few of the teams manages to get their technical act really together such that they even finished the race. McClaren seemed the most consistent (3rd & 4th) and whilst Mercedes and Red Bull were ahead at the finish, they only managed to keep one car running each. ( and the Red Bull may yet be disqualified anyway)
It appeared that many teams just could not get the ERS (electrical power) working as it should, leaving them way off the pace (EG , Vetel, Hamilton etc). But with such a silly restricted testing allowance , that is not surprising.


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

They sound unmistakably "V6" just like the 80's/90's but I cant believe how fucking slow they are. They are visibly slow.
*10 years ago* Schumacher was 8 seconds faster per lap than this.
This strengthens my philosophy that to make power you have to waste power. As soon as you start trying to be efficient you start going slow.

Australians arnt shy of making their feelings known. The cheers from the crowd (and my living room) when Vettel broke down were unmistakable.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

8 secs a lap is nothing. ..That could simply be the difference in tyres used.
Slower lap times dont worry me, nor does the slower speeds or the reduced power and noise... ( i think it a very "technical" sound now)
But, what i do want to see is better racing, more overtaking, more driver input...IE, better competition. I prefer the wet races because they demand more driver input
Now that the drivers have to think about when to use their ERS and have to control the higher torque, it has added some interest for me.
But we seem to still have the confusion over the regulations. !


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Karter2 said:


> 8 secs a lap is nothing. ..That could simply be the difference in tyres used.


LOL 8 seconds is an ice-age in F1 racing

They had grooved tires in 2004 so I dont think thats it.

See ! see the grooves !


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

.. Must say ..that is "groovy" !
..The difference between the "Soft" and the "medium" compounds at Melbourne was 2 sec a lap and we know these tyres are designed to limit performance.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

I didn't see the race, but I listened to some testing videos yesterday - I don't like it. Turbo V6 sounds like we're back in the 80s again - classic ICE sound.  The high-revving NA V8/10s sounded otherworldly, spaceship-like. A step backwards, IMO...

FIA sucks (along with many other sanctioning bodies). One of the reasons I lost interest in drag racing is some of my favorite tracks ended up under the dictates of the "racing lords", and what's required just to step on their hallowed grounds is ludicrous. Like a new Corvette could get kicked off the track for not having a roll cage - yeah, that compact car with the bolt-in cage is much safer... Idiots.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)




----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

I don't know what the volume settings were on that recording but I remember the old turbo days
Those cars were LOUD - I could not take any pictures at practice at Brands Hatch because I had to put my camera down and cover my ears

The old Cosworths were a LOT quieter than the turbo cars


----------



## dedlast (Aug 17, 2013)

Wow, that sounds like the difference between Formula one and Formula 3 (or whatever a giant step down in power is). Hard to tell from the video if they were running close to the same speed, but from comments I've seen, I don't think they were.

Bill


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

The YouTube vid, notice the spectators wearing earmuffs in 2013 and then in 2014, no earmuffs


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Nice vid here but I will warn you that Vettel is in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-Bb9KkQwKM


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

I thought we were EV enthusiasts on this forum ?
...so why the concern over engine noise reduction ?
Actually, there were several positive comments from the Monaco commentators about how interesting it was to be able to hear the tyre noise under cornering and braking now.

also picked up a comment that drivers were having to adapt to the fact that this years engines are giving "up to five times more torque" than last years.
I assume they are referring to a better torque spread due to the MGU K driving the turbo at lower rpm resulting in much higher low speed torque than a NA motor can give.


----------



## DaniYo (Jul 1, 2014)

Well with several races under their belts, the F1 teams seem to have become more consistent. Vetel hasn't dominated as in past years. 

Earlier in the discussion, 4WD was discussed and dismissed. F1 hasn't adopted it and may never but the Le Mans Prototypes have taken electric drive to the front wheels with great success. Unfortunately, they seem to keep the technology to themselves much more than F1. I've been trying to get more detail about their designs and haven't had much luck. Anyone know what kind of motors and energy storage they use? I've heard that Audi, Toyota and Porsche all have very different approaches to engergy recovery and reuse.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

DaniYo said:


> the Le Mans Prototypes have taken electric drive to the front wheels with great success.....
> Anyone know what kind of motors and energy storage they use? I've heard that Audi, Toyota and Porsche all have very different approaches to engergy recovery and reuse.


 Porsche are using LiPo battery for storage.
Toyota are using Ultra Capacitors
Audi are using the "Flybrid" kinetic energy storage.
Lots of detail on the net via google


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Might as well turn this thread into an F1 season discussion.
Looks like Vettel is off the hook as F1's most hated driver.
Last night Rosberg seized that moniker with both hands as he acted on a saboteur level not just puncturing Ham's rear tire but denying Team Mercedes a much deserved 1-2 finish.
Rosberg actually admitted he deliberately maintained his track position to "prove a point" and did not yield to Ham by pulling off the track like even Vettel did on the previous lap in the very same corner.
He was booed on the podium. Wolff is talking about reprimands.

Generally the Hybrids are proving 4 to 8 seconds slower at every track.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Yea ! but doesnt it get good news coverage with a little controversy to spice it up.
Wolf may issue a "reprimand", but likely Bernie will quietly give Niko a pat on the back !
..it certainly didnt upset the Red Bull guys !!


> Generally the Hybrids are proving 4 to 8 seconds slower at every track


 True , but more likely due to tyre, aero, and other spec' changes than any lack of power or torque.
One "grade" of tyre can make 3 sec's a lap difference.

Strange that Vettel is so out of the picture this year,..as the car obviously has the pace now.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

RIPPERTON said:


> Might as well turn this thread into an F1 season discussion.
> Looks like Vettel is off the hook as F1's most hated driver.
> Last night Rosberg seized that moniker with both hands as he acted on a saboteur level not just puncturing Ham's rear tire but denying Team Mercedes a much deserved 1-2 finish.
> Rosberg actually admitted he deliberately maintained his track position to "prove a point" and did not yield to Ham by pulling off the track like even Vettel did on the previous lap in the very same corner.
> ...


To prove a point 
In other words he did NOT wimp out and let Ham get away with pushing him off the track

As a long term F1 fan I have noticed that some drivers,
Senna, Schumacher, Alonso, Vettel
cultivate a "get out of my way" attitude 
This works very well and enables them to overtake
The other part of this is the "pliable" attitude
Some drivers let the others get away with it

Hamilton has been trying to push Rosberg around - and the only thing for Rosberg to do it to show that he is not one of the wimps

Was it a "stretch" maneuver? 
Yes - I think so 
But it wasn't that much of a "stretch" as the stewards decided it was a "racing incident" 

As far as the cars are concerned - absolutely love them


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Rosberg seems to think hes a one man team driving his own car and has no obligations to anyone. I think Wolff will point out to Rosberg that he is driving a Mercedes and there are obviously responsibilities that are conditional to being employed by a team that is paying him millions of Euro. 
If Rosberg hadn't punctured Hams tire they could have ruled the whole race by having a big glorious dogfight to the checkers.
Its like Rosberg would prefer to share the podium with Ricciardo than Ham.
I also think the "make a point" thing is very weak.
Rosberg's front wing tip was behind Hams rear axle. He was so far back Ham would have been correct in thinking Rosberg was not challenging him for the race line.
Your right Duncan, Rosberg is playing swing that dick but hes created such a dark cloud within the team now that he may have just Alfa Maled himself out of a job.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

RIPPERTON said:


> Rosberg seems to think hes a one man team driving his own car and has no obligations to anyone. .


Rosberg does???

This is after Ham has run him off the road - twice!

And after Ham refused team instructions - costing Rosberg a win!
- both cars on different strategies - 
it has always been normal for a team to ask a driver to move over to avoid damaging the other drivers race

I think Rosberg has damaged his chances by not giving Ham a good smack earlier


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Duncan said:


> Rosberg does???
> 
> This is after Ham has run him off the road - twice!
> 
> And after Ham refused team instructions - costing Rosberg a win!...r


Hamilton is no saint. He races to the limit of the rules.
He is racing for the "professional" drivers championship, which is different to a sporting drivers competition. The era of "gentlemen" racers, ended with the likes of Graham Hill and Jackie Stewart. Shoemaker put the nail firmly in the "sporting" coffin for F1.
As with many of the other race craft skills, modern F1 drivers have to know just how far they can push the limits of the rules...
Niko just pushed a fraction too far for a split second !
Always keep in mind also, that these days there is an element of "entertainment" and "theatre" involved for the international TV audiences, so a certain amount of over reaction should be expected !


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

_Shoemaker put the nail firmly in the "sporting" coffin for F1._

No I think that was Senna - driving into Prost
(And Prost driving into Senna a bit later)

Nothing Shumacher did was nearly as blatant


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Duncan said:


> Rosberg does???
> And after Ham refused team instructions - costing Rosberg a win!


In no instance did Ham cause Rosberg to retire from any race thus far.
Every finish has been as close to a (1-2) as you could get.
There was only Rosbergs Gearbox failure at Silverstone that caused him to DNF, hardly Hams fault.
So I would say that Ham has his priorities right ie The team comes first, Ham comes second, Rosberg comes third.
He knows Wolff will forgive him for ignoring team orders, if they end up finishing 1-2 ie. not letting Rosberg past but would not forgive him for booting Rosberg out of the race.
Rosberg needs to play the game bitch.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

_Strange that Vettel is so out of the picture this year,..as the car obviously has the pace now._

This is strange - but also normal,
Some people seem to be able to drive the wheels off one car - and not another

This always leads to dopey people talking about "teams favoring one driver"

Me - I think that the teams do their best and the technology in turn leads to different cars responding differently
If you are lucky your car is "right" for your own internal "software"

If your software does not like something about the car you can work on it and your team can work on it - but if your team-mate does not have the problem.....

Senna came of age when the Turbo's needed a real balancing act 
Vettel did his magic when the engine was used to directly effect downforce
Shumacher just had the skills and worked harder than anybody else

Maybe the new Bull just suits Daniel


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

Well month ago it was Mercedes drivers letting the team down, now its the team letting the drivers down.
Nico's car failed on numerous different levels before the race even started.
Then with 10 laps to go, Ham was slightly outpacing the RedBulls, they were all on old tires but Hams engineers kept him on the track too long just so they could get him back out between the 2 RedBulls after a pit stop completely overlooking the fact that with new tires Ham could have easily passed both of the RedBulls and had more time to do it.


----------



## RIPPERTON (Jan 26, 2010)

F1 KERS unit looks like a Remy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9fAnjgR8lA


----------



## Nuts&Volts (Dec 20, 2011)

They used to be Zytek 55kW units. Similiar units used in the Smart EV car


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

It's not a controlled unit , so I guess each engine builder will have their own preference of KERS motor/generator.
I believe Ferrari were using MagnetoMinorelli systems, and Honda had their own design.
Personally I am more interested in what cells they are using that they have managed to get to last 4000km ( which must be at least 1-2000 cycles ) of massive charge/discharge rates 
I'm pretty sure, A123 supply some teams with special cells, and Saft are often linked with Ferrari and Renault.
But nothing that we can get our hands on I bet.


----------



## Vanquizor (Nov 17, 2009)

I'm not sure the charge/discharge rates are as massive as you are picturing. Discharge power is limited to 120kW to the wheels and energy to under 1.12kWh per lap, charging is caped at 555Wh per lap through the wheels and whatever you want to harvest whenever off the turbo. 

Battery is limited to 25KG max 20kg min. Using stuff that is available to us that would be 2.5 to 3kWh of battery giving us max discharge rate of ~50c. It is obvious that charging is where they are pushing spec and they are free to run the battery at the point that gives them the best charge characteristics. They are also free to buffer the battery with capacitors respecting the same weight limits which I am sure they are taking advantage of...

Don't get me wrong the performance level is high, but its not EEStor high... you can order from hobbyking and exceed their discharge levels.


----------



## Tomdb (Jan 28, 2013)

Now do that for the amount of laps they run in fomula 1. I can only imagine the harsh cycles the batteries do per race/practice. Would love to build a car to do tests like that. I believe that they could increase the performance but then again the teams with alot of money would win (unlike they are doing now  (joke)).


----------



## Vanquizor (Nov 17, 2009)

Don't imagine... do math. Monacco is probably the worst for cycles- 8 real braking zones and maybe 150 laps total. Say 1200 cycles at 20% or less DOD for the week-end... again much better if buffering with capacitor.

Sepang is probably the worst for the system though because there is no cool air to be had anywhere!


----------



## Tomdb (Jan 28, 2013)

The thermal managment of the whole system; battery inverters motors and the engine will be the biggest hurdle. So simulating will be a pain in the ass, not undo-able but too many unknowns.


----------



## Vanquizor (Nov 17, 2009)

There I agree 100% for me that is the art of F1- thermal and airflow management!


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Vanquizor said:


> Don't imagine... do math. Monacco is probably the worst for cycles- 8 real braking zones and maybe 150 laps total. Say 1200 cycles at 20% or less DOD for the week-end... again much better if buffering with capacitor.
> e!


Using your figures , 2.5 kWhr pack ( I doubt high performance cells will be high energy density ?)
I have seen 400volts quoted as the system voltage in the past....it may be more on some systems, but that implies a 6.25 Ahr pack capacity
And 555 Whr regeon per lap, and 8 braking zones ( say total 8 secs ? )
Mix that lot up and you see they have 8 secs ( probably less) per lap , to regen 555Whr into a 6.25 Ahr , 400v, pack.
Seems to average 630 Amps ! Or 100+C regen !
I am not aware of any current Li cell that can handle Anything like 50-100C charge rates,.....let alone survive 1000's of cycles doing it !
Sure , Ultracaps will help, but they are heavy and bulky, and their weight ( and capacity ?). has to be included in the pack total 25 kg weight, so you have reduced the pack capacity .
I'm sure they don't always regen fully on one lap, but likewise some tracks don't offer as much braking time either, so there are probably worse situations.
So, I still believe they have some incredible cell technology stuffed under their seats !


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

200mph to 100 mph at 3g is 2.9 seconds
I think they will have well over 8 seconds in a lap, probably close to three times that,
The shortest circuits are also those that do the most braking
So that drops to 30C - there is also the energy recovered from the turbo


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Duncan,
Where did you get the 3G figure from ?
I'm pretty sure they see a lot more G than that under braking .
The braking zones are often no more than 50 mtrs at the end of fast straights.
That distance is less than 1 sec at an average of 200km/HR. ( 300-100 Km/hr braking)
Somewhere like Monaco the speeds are lower and the braking distances much shorter.
However, even at a 30C regen rate, that would still be like charging a 6 Ahr cell at 180 amps.
What cell do you know that could take that charge ?
And if so, how many time in an hour could it do it ?
From F1 Wiki....


> .....carbon brakes in combination with tyre technology and the car's aerodynamics produce truly remarkable braking forces. The deceleration force under braking is usually 4 g (39 m/s2), and can be as high as 5–6 g when braking from extreme speeds, for instance at the Gilles Villeneuve circuit or at Indianapolis.
> ........ An F1 car can brake from 200 km/h (124 mph) to a complete stop in just 2.21 seconds, using only 65 metres (213 ft).[19].........


...and that is referring to cars from 2-3 years ago !


----------



## Tomdb (Jan 28, 2013)

a variant of the a123 cell was used in the first few Kres units.

http://www.a123batteries.com/v/vspfiles/images/pdf/APR18650M1A.pdf

This one can already do roughly 4c charge. But since money is no issue, a123 probally made small batches of monster cells, that could survive just enough F1 races and then be toast.

Here is a sheet listing some of the more advanced cells from a123.
https://www.ballisticparts.com/pdf/SDSBatteryEnglishBT.pdf

I bet som titanate mixes might do even better.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

The video of the Mercedes team stated the batteries last 4000 km, ..that's at least equivalent to 10 races,..or 500-1,000 charge cycles at 50+C !,,
EDIT....
Oops ! ( sorry , I must remember not to post late at night after a bottle or two of wine !)
...that obviously is wrong, 
4000km may be 10 GP's ( ? Possibly 600laps? ) but not necessarily full charge cycles.
This is all "pulse" charging , 10-20%fractional capacity, but at very high C rates.


----------



## EVsonic (Aug 14, 2014)

Maybe they are using Kokam cells,

The sonic can Regen brake 100 kph to 0 in 49 meters and 3.1 seconds and 600 amps back in to the pack. This was measured by the engineer with 3 separate GPS trackers on the air strip.

Cheers Kiwi


----------



## tommypress (Jul 20, 2016)

When it comes to f1, I only have the heart for the action on field only. No technicality compares to a fine race.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Of course the race is the main attraction, but when one or two teams become so dominant due to a technical advantage, then the technology becomes a focus for enthusiasts as the race is somewhat predictable.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Karter2
I have been an F1 fan from the 1980's until about 3 years ago when I decided that the Sky Sport cost was too high
The vast majority of that time one team has been "dominant due to a technical advantage"
Remember the TAG McLaren times when the first two cars would lap the third place man!


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Yes, Sky is a total rort, but at least this year their pre and post race coverage is top class with much more technical insight and strategy analysis with good access to the pit garages and drivers etc.
In addition to their own commentary team . They have Brundle, Herbert, Hill, etc, as ex drivers for the inside view and gossip.
In reality, there have not been too many years where one or two teams have not had total dominance on the track. Even back in the '70s with team Lotus, or the 90's with Williams (Mansel) , or the Ferrari /Shumacher period, Brawn ( unbeatable for one year !), McClaren, Red Bull, and lately Mercedes.
Sadly, the days of driver having the most influence on the result, are long gone.
In fact, the pit crew are probably more critical to the result today !


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

_Sadly, the days of driver having the most influence on the result, are long gone.
_
I'm not actually old enough to remember a period like that!

No that's not true - in the team mate war it's almost all driver - but team to team?

The last big change was when Schumacher brought a more professional hard working mindset to the sport - which rapidly became universal

Part of the reason that the driver makes so little difference is that they are all bloody superb - the worst of them is still an amazingly skilled driver


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

I intended to add that if you prefer the action on the track, then Fox are also covering the RedBull Global Rallycross series, which has become very commercial with most top manufacturers represented with top level drivers...Solberg, Lobe, Foust, S Speed, Piquet jnr, Atkinson, Millen, etc etc.
Cars are 2ltr, 650bhp, 4 WD, and very spectacular on mixed surfaces ..tarmac, gravel, sand, mud, jumps , etc.
Competition is very close and physical at times, with drivers being a major factor.
http://redbullglobalrallycross.com
There is also aEuropean series that is just as spectacular.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Karter2 said:


> I intended to add that if you prefer the action on the track, then Fox are also covering the RedBull Global Rallycross series, which has become very commercial with most top manufacturers represented with top level drivers...Solberg, Lobe, Foust, S Speed, Piquet jnr, Atkinson, Millen, etc etc.
> .


Get Thee behind me Satan!
I am getting far too little done as it is!


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Thats why there is Fox IQ / Fox GO / PVR ...
So you can catch up on these things when you have spare time...where ever you are ! .


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

....and of course, if you really want to see men putting their lives on the line , wrestling a race machine, then it has to be MotoGP.
Those guys are insane, and its probably the motorsport where the human input is the most decisive.


----------



## kennybobby (Aug 10, 2012)

*Malaysian GP*

Never a dull moment--a fireball of excitement and what a race.

i have to agree about MotoGP, that's my favorite of all.


----------

