KERS in 2010?

[Knock-on]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78786

Williams plan to use it so where will this leave other teams?

[Big Ben]

I think McLaren and Ferrari like Williams a lot a this point.

[SGWilko]

I think McLaren and Ferrari like Williams a lot a this point.

Between you, me and the gate post, I suspect allowing Williams back into FOTA and then announcing they will run KERS is an orchestrated happening....

Now, if the new FIA head will allow less strict rules on KERS use during the races, it's application and relevance to road cars will be much more aligned.

[Knock-on]

I think McLaren and Ferrari like Williams a lot a this point.

I think you may be correct ;)

This was really a case study on the unity of FOTA. The teams ganging up and ignoring a set of rules dictated by the FIA.

As soon as it favours a team to ignore FOTA, then they do.

FOTA is fundementally flawed. I believe the teams either thought it could be more powerfull than was possible of it was a bluff.

If FOTA wants to achieve unity, then it shouldn't try and address things that can't be ignored when it suits one team over another.

[Mark]

I think teams were too quick to dismiss KERS given the problems many teams had with it at the start of the year. McLaren at least have proven that KERS is a worthwhile technology.

Personally I think they should get rid of the restrictions on the amount of seconds it can be used per lap.

It should be; if you can collect the power, then you can use it, simple as that.

[Big Ben]

I think teams were too quick to dismiss KERS given the problems many teams had with it at the start of the year. McLaren at least have proven that KERS is a worthwhile technology.

Personally I think they should get rid of the restrictions on the amount of seconds it can be used per lap.

It should be; if you can collect the power, then you can use it, simple as that.

Hear, hear!

[SGWilko]

It should be; if you can collect the power, then you can use it, simple as that.

Exactly, and this will be so much more relevant to the 'real world'.

The development of batteries alone will be of great benefit to the car industry alone.

[Sonic]

It should be; if you can collect the power, then you can use it, simple as that.

Indeed! BMW quit partly because F1 was moving away from renewable power, I wonder how they feel now?

IMO I would like to see fuel restrictions on race days and using KERS to boost power back up. This would give F1 a far better image - plus is far more relevant to the real world.

[SGWilko]

Indeed! BMW quit partly because F1 was moving away from renewable power, I wonder how they feel now?.

Well, I hope not, because they gave up on their KERS, didn't they? Had their budget been slashed already by then, is that why they had an overweight underdeveloped system?

[SGWilko]

IMO I would like to see fuel restrictions on race days and using KERS to boost power back up. This would give F1 a far better image - plus is far more relevant to the real world.

Well, no refuelling in 2010. So, year on year they should;

Increase allowance of KERS, and

Decrease starting fuel allowance.

[V12]

I'm in the "let them use as much power as they can harness" brigade. The setup as it is, is lets face it nothing more than a silly Champ Car-style "push to pass" button, with a sprinkling of "green" credentials. I'm convinced that had they made it unlimited, you'd probably see the entire field running it now, whether with a self-developed system or one bought in.

[Sonic]

Well, no refuelling in 2010. So, year on year they should;

Increase allowance of KERS, and

Decrease starting fuel allowance.

Now I may be talking out of a hole other than my mouth but wasn't that the plan all along? I'm sure I remember Max saying KERS power would be boosted year on year. I certainly favour the system you propose as it would certainly give F1 back something it has been lacking in recent years - innovation. Hell if they restricted fuel they could remove the engine freeze too and allow the manufactures to spend money on something that will help their road cars.
.

[Robinho]

i'm not sure about removing all restrictions, retain either the max power or the amount of time it can be used (i'm in favour of a specific amount of time and as much power as you can squeeze out of the system)

i had a feeling that Williams rejoining FOTA would include the readmittance of KERS and some other concessions from Williams in return (3 car teams anyone - see Williams latest statement that they would support 3 car teams as liong as the 3rd car were a rookie)

[Sonic]

i had a feeling that Williams rejoining FOTA would include the readmittance of KERS and some other concessions from Williams in return (3 car teams anyone - see Williams latest statement that they would support 3 car teams as liong as the 3rd car were a rookie)

Not that you're a cynic ;)

There will certainly be some bargaining behind closed doors but I doubt 3 car teams will happen. Even if only 12 teams show up next season thats still a pretty big grid in modern times, and if all 14 rock up to the first race we are talking 40+ cars in total with 3 cars per team. Awesome fun - but not gonna happen. Fact (or i'll eat your shoes - mine are new ;) )

[CNR]

http://www.itv-f1.com/news_article.aspx?id=46935


Technical director Sam Michael says the Grove-based squad – which has been experimenting with a flywheel-based device but has not raced it so far – is continuing to develop its KERS with a view to using it next season.
“We fully support the use of KERS and always have done,” he said.

[ioan]

Not that you're a cynic ;)

There will certainly be some bargaining behind closed doors but I doubt 3 car teams will happen. Even if only 12 teams show up next season thats still a pretty big grid in modern times, and if all 14 rock up to the first race we are talking 40+ cars in total with 3 cars per team. Awesome fun - but not gonna happen. Fact (or i'll eat your shoes - mine are new ;) )

No one said that ALL the teams have to run 3 cars. ;)

[aryan]

i'm not sure about removing all restrictions, retain either the max power or the amount of time it can be used (i'm in favour of a specific amount of time and as much power as you can squeeze out of the system)
)

I like this too. No limitations at all is a bit dangerous. It may lead to a new "Turbo" era, with the cars just getting too fast, or the RPM wars of a few years ago when they first ran the V8 with no rev-limiter, the Cossie was going past 20,000 RPM pretty easily, and then you'd see a cloud of smoke coming off the back of the Williams.

But KERS right now is a joke. It has no relevance to the real world, where the real world, for certain, is moving towards electric cars in the next decade. If only the removed the limitation on max power, you'd see so much R&D on how to retain as much energy as possible from breaking, that would be very applicable to the road cars in near future.

[rah]

I agree with most on this. If you want to limit something, limit fuel. If you want to limit KERS, then limit the battery size. Anything else like this push button boost is a joke. It would be great to see some innovation in F1 that you can actually identify.

[SGWilko]

I like this too. No limitations at all is a bit dangerous. It may lead to a new "Turbo" era, with the cars just getting too fast, or the RPM wars of a few years ago when they first ran the V8 with no rev-limiter, the Cossie was going past 20,000 RPM pretty easily, and then you'd see a cloud of smoke coming off the back of the Williams.

In fairness to Cosworth, nine times out of ten it was the WIlliams seemless shift 'box that created the smoke as it lunched on its own internals. While development of the Cosworth was non existent at best, it was not an unreliable motor IIRC.

[Mark]

I don't see why there has to be a limit. Remember there laws of physics already dictate that there is only so much energy you can get back during the braking process. So it's not like we're going to see 1000bhp cars all running the entire lap on electric power.

[SGWilko]

One thing I have never quite grasped about the way KERS works when deployed is this;

When you use KERS, surely, it will cause the engine to rev higher than the permitted 18000rpm? I just don't see how the extra power is applied without increasing the rpm?

Anyone know, because I am baffled?

[Mark]

One thing I have never quite grasped about the way KERS works when deployed is this;

When you use KERS, surely, it will cause the engine to rev higher than the permitted 18000rpm? I just don't see how the extra power is applied without increasing the rpm?

Anyone know, because I am baffled?

The power is supplied by an extra motor external to the engine and I believe it basically assists the engine in getting up to it's full revs rather than increasing the revs itself. Although I'm probably completely wrong!

[SGWilko]

The power is supplied by an extra motor external to the engine and I believe it basically assists the engine in getting up to it's full revs rather than increasing the revs itself. Although I'm probably completely wrong!

That makes some sense. But, what about the double KERS use at the start/finish straight at Monza, you'd expect the engines to be at full chat as the cars cross the line, what happens when you deploy KERS then?

Got me scratching my head so it has.

[AndyL]

That makes some sense. But, what about the double KERS use at the start/finish straight at Monza, you'd expect the engines to be at full chat as the cars cross the line, what happens when you deploy KERS then?

Got me scratching my head so it has.

You would adjust your gearing so that even after a double KERS boost, you still only just touch max revs in top gear at the end of the straight. Or maybe even a bit less so that you have a few revs to spare in case you pick up a slipstream.

[SGWilko]

You would adjust your gearing so that even after a double KERS boost, you still only just touch max revs in top gear at the end of the straight. Or maybe even a bit less so that you have a few revs to spare in case you pick up a slipstream.

Makes sense too

What if the KERS system goes for a Burton???? We have seen races where Ferrari have had to switch off KERS during a race without any obvious overhead on performance.

And surely, you'd want too ADD the 80hp from KERS to the max BHP from the engine, which, one assumes, is max output at max rpm's???

[Sonic]

You would adjust your gearing so that even after a double KERS boost, you still only just touch max revs in top gear at the end of the straight. Or maybe even a bit less so that you have a few revs to spare in case you pick up a slipstream.

Indeed. We have seen some races in the rev limit era where cars hit the rev limiter in top gear because the wind has swung around or something.

[Robinho]

i don't think they would emloy KERS at top revs in top gear as the benefit would be negated by the aero drag, they use it in acceleration zones.

does the power work directky from a motor to the wheels or to the engine? admittedly i assume the increased wheel speed would work back to increase the revs anyway, but i don't see why it would have any effect on the rev limit, they'd just change gear quicker wouldn't they?

[Sonic]

Most of the explanations do not explain whether the rpm is increased momentarily which I doubt as the engines are supposed to be restricted.

If i understand the question - No. Hitting the KERS at 200mph at 18,000 revs would do nothing other than p!ss away the charge into bouncing off the limiter.

Even without the rev limit hitting KERS at top wack would do little as 80BHP would do little to overcome the drag generated at that sort of speed. Its only really useful when still accelerating.

[Sonic]

i don't think they would emloy KERS at top revs in top gear as the benefit would be negated by the aero drag, they use it in acceleration zones.

does the power work directky from a motor to the wheels or to the engine? admittedly i assume the increased wheel speed would work back to increase the revs anyway, but i don't see why it would have any effect on the rev limit, they'd just change gear quicker wouldn't they?

Snap! ;)

[SGWilko]

Fair points guys.

I still don't get it (I feel like I am back in school here!! ;) )

Why do they use KERS twice on the start finish straight, when, you would assume the cars are at top whack?

Please sir, may I go to the bathroom? :D

[Sonic]

Fair points guys.

I still don't get it (I feel like I am back in school here!! ;) )

Why do they use KERS twice on the start finish straight, when, you would assume the cars are at top whack?

Please sir, may I go to the bathroom? :D

You should have gone before you came to class boy!

No seriously on my part this is educated guess work but I would suggest the double hit at Monza is unique to the circuit design. Exit speed of the final turn would be something around the 140mph mark so use a big blast of KERS there then as you cross start finish line at 190mph another boost (less effective at the higher drag but every MPH down that long straight has got to help).

[Mark]

If i understand the question - No. Hitting the KERS at 200mph at 18,000 revs would do nothing other than p!ss away the charge into bouncing off the limiter.

Even without the rev limit hitting KERS at top wack would do little as 80BHP would do little to overcome the drag generated at that sort of speed. Its only really useful when still accelerating.

That's my understanding. It's the window between being "traction limited", i.e. the tyres simply cannot but any more power down to the road, and being limited by the aero drag. So it helps them get up to speed faster, which is why KERS cars are so feared off the start line as they can accelerate considerably faster than non-KERS cars.

[Mark]

Whatever they decide to do I think KERS in Formula 1 is a good thing and shouldn't just be immediately scrapped.

McLarens system in 1999 was slightly different in that it didn't use a motor to give a boost to the engine. Instead they charged up a battery which then allowed them to disconnect the alternator from the engine and the cars internal systems and engine electronics would run from battery power for a short period of time. This meant that the alternator didn't induce any drag on the engine and thus gave them more power.

[Mark]

Ah right I don't know much about it, but I know it used the same energy gathered from the braking system, but I didn't realised it wasn't a motor as such... The article I read just said:

"Mario Illien created a system for Mercedes in 1999 that used hydraulic fluid pressure to recover energy lost in braking. It would have provided a 45bhp power boost for four seconds but could have been used many times per lap. The system developed by McLaren in conjunction with Mercedes for the 2009 season is an electrical based hybrid system."
http://www.gizmag.com/formula-one-kers/11324/

:)

Sounds about right, but I had thought it was a battery based system.

[ioan]

I don't see why there has to be a limit. Remember there laws of physics already dictate that there is only so much energy you can get back during the braking process. So it's not like we're going to see 1000bhp cars all running the entire lap on electric power.

Exactly.
The car with the biggest and most powerful engine will not necessarily be the fastest around a circuit.
The laws of physics are enough of a limitation.

[Sonic]

laws of physics are enough of a limitation.

Hello Scotty! ;)


McLarens system in 1999 was slightly different in that it didn't use a motor to give a boost to the engine. Instead they charged up a battery which then allowed them to disconnect the alternator from the engine and the cars internal systems and engine electronics would run from and the cars internal systems and engine electronics would run from battery power for a short period of time. This meant that the alternator didn't induce any drag on the engine and thus gave them more power. battery power for a short period of time. This meant that the alternator battery power for a short period of time. This meant that the alternator didn't induce any drag on the engine and thus gave them more power

Twas a good system. Talking of good systems from'99 let's bring back the FTT - I always thought that was a great idea. The packaging was all wrong in the Benetton but with ten years of technological improvements it could be good. Tell me I'm wrong ;)

[ioan]

Hello Scotty! ;)

:?:

[Sonic]

:?:

Sorry - star trek ref.... (check out my sig - huge geek!)

[Mark]

Yer cannay change the laws of physics cap'n!

[SGWilko]

Sorry - star trek ref.... (check out my sig - huge geek!)

Oh, I thought the sig was a reference to a trump!!!!

[ioan]

Oh, I thought the sig was a reference to a trump!!!!

:D

[Sonic]

Ok its gone! :D

[SGWilko]

I see from the in-car pics that the Red Bull has a digital speedo on the wheel....