FOTA agrees to drop KERS from 2010

[safeaschuck]

When did you see someone purchasing an SUV on the basis that this one gets better mileage than that one....not likely. "This one has more cup-holders".

I dunno? Although I was over in the states a couple of months back and I bought a good few car mags to have a read of, consumer mags, you know, not trade ones. I saw a lot of adverts showing how this Ford truck got better gas milage than that GM one, and a lot of talk of MPG in adverts and articles. My Aunt had a near new Honda, bought herself which had stickers in the window saying 'super low emissions' and my uncle had parked his Durango (his own personal one), with it's 5 point something liter 'Magnum' V8 and was cycling to the bus stop where he would catch the bus to meet his car pool buddies.
Plus I saw more Prius's on one trip down the interstate than I have in the since the damn thing's came out over here in jolly old England. Then again we are spoilt for choice when it come's to frugal cars so why mess about with a hybrid.

[Richard]

The "Super-Mileage" folks will tell you the best way to improve mileage is to stay off the brakes and drive smoothly. Not going to charge up the KERs very quickly doing that.

In an urban setting, or twisty country road, you have to brake and that is where hybrid/KERS cars work so well.

Sorry for being dim, what is the difference between KERS and conventional hybrid cars? In my mind, KERS is about short term boost for max performance, while a conventional hybrid is maintaining the same performance with a reduced fuel demand.

[safeaschuck]

Sorry for being dim, what is the difference between KERS and conventional hybrid cars?

I'm going with 'not much' KERS just means Kenetic Energy Recovery so it is one of the methods which can be used to increase fuel milage (or performance) on any car with a compatible storage system (batteries being mainly used in F1).
Really all F1 cars are hybrids this year (probably only ever this year). After all Hybrid was a word selected to describe a vehicle which used a combination of different types of motor and/or energy storage systems, say a battery and motor system, plus an I.C. engine and fuel tank.
F1 cars are just more restricted on how and when they can store and deliver some of their power.

[Richard]

Really all F1 cars are hybrids this year (probably only ever this year). After all Hybrid was a word selected to describe a vehicle which used a combination of different types of motor and/or energy storage systems, say a battery and motor system, plus an I.C. engine and fuel tank.

I guess the the unique bit about the F1 hybrid is that it is designed for intense short bursts of power, so the tech transfer to road cars would probably have been for the sports market.

AFIK the F1 KERS is also unique in being part of the inline drive train, as opposed to the road cars which have the eletric motor in parallel to conventional engine????

Shame the the flywheel systems didn't work out, they would have been a significant differentiator to the current battery orientated hyrbid road cars. One can't help thinking that a flywheel must be more efficient thanj the conversion from mechanical power, to electrical, and back agin.

[ISLAMATRON]

I think we will see the flywheel systems on the new F2 cars and in Le mans soon.

Changing the hybrid from performance to fuel saving is merely the addition of some lines of code in both the KERS computer controls and the ECU... like the lexus hybrids it can easily & seamlessly switch between the two at will.

[safeaschuck]

AFIK the F1 KERS is also unique in being part of the inline drive train, as opposed to the road cars which have the eletric motor in parallel to conventional engine????

Yep, I guess, odd that it would force feed a crankshaft seemingly working against the engine's compression.

Shame the the flywheel systems didn't work out, they would have been a significant differentiator to the current battery orientated hyrbid road cars. One can't help thinking that a flywheel must be more efficient thanj the conversion from mechanical power, to electrical, and back agin.

My thoughts exactly, and with the CVT as proposed in the flybrid system the D.C. motor would effectively be in Parallel with the conventional engine.

[WhiteBlue]

KERS remains an option for 2010 and Williams have not been party to the FOTA agreement to not use it. I wonder if this may shift the FOTA position. Also Force India could use the Mercedes system 2010 and embarrass the silver arrows once again. How can FOTA stick to their decision if those guys simply push the options they have?

[axle]

Wonder if they could just standardise it and use it as a "success ballast" solution - ie more power per lap if you're at the back of the grid...would make the 1st corner rather fun all the time

[djos]

Wonder if they could just standardise it and use it as a "success ballast" solution - ie more power per lap if you're at the back of the grid...would make the 1st corner rather fun all the time

KERS makes the start of the races dangerous enuf as it is, the sooner it is banned the better! [-o<

[Giblet]

AFIK the F1 KERS is also unique in being part of the inline drive train, as opposed to the road cars which have the eletric motor in parallel to conventional engine????

Yep, I guess, odd that it would force feed a crankshaft seemingly working against the engine's compression.

Shame the the flywheel systems didn't work out, they would have been a significant differentiator to the current battery orientated hyrbid road cars. One can't help thinking that a flywheel must be more efficient thanj the conversion from mechanical power, to electrical, and back agin.

My thoughts exactly, and with the CVT as proposed in the flybrid system the D.C. motor would effectively be in Parallel with the conventional engine.

Putting power directly to the crankshaft is the way of the future. Lookup turbo compounding, where you use exhaust gasses to spin a turbine that feeds that power mechanically to the shaft. No extra fuel needed like when a compressor pumps air into the motor. Free power. I think when the crank gets help spinning from another source, the compression isn't fought but the gas side can now do more for less. I think you only fight compression when you slow the motor.

[MegaHurts]

KERS makes the start of the races dangerous enuf as it is, the sooner it is banned the better! [-o<

Why? Because some cars have more power than others at the start? Before this crappy engine equalisation that was always the case.

[djos]

KERS makes the start of the races dangerous enuf as it is, the sooner it is banned the better! [-o<

Why? Because some cars have more power than others at the start? Before this crappy engine equalisation that was always the case.

No, because you end up with too many cars fighting over limited real estate and this results in accidents.

eg 1/ Webber banging into Rubens and then touching Hamilton's rear tire putting LH out of contention.

2/ Kimi banging wheels with Vettel putting SV out of contention.

I predict that if it keeps up there is going to be a huge accident that takes out a big chunk of the grid in the near future.

The fact is the the KERS cars aren't fast enuf to qualify up the front on merit but they are fast enuf to get there using their boost button and i'm quite certain a decent size pile up will happen as a result.

[ISLAMATRON]

HA! Webber banging into Rubans... That is now KERS fault, and so was the hole in the O-zone and JFK's assassination

Webbo swerved and hit RB, no body with KERS around yet, Webbo & Hamilton and drove towards each other under braking, it had nothing to do with KERS.

There is a huge difference between clean and dirty side of the track and that contributes to the traffic jam, no complaints?

Now you want to blame the famous SPA pileup on KERS too?

There will allways be a traffic jam at the start of the race, hence the excitement of standing start.

[WhiteBlue]

KERS makes the start of the races dangerous enuf as it is, the sooner it is banned the better! [-o<

Why? Because some cars have more power than others at the start? Before this crappy engine equalisation that was always the case.

No, because you end up with too many cars fighting over limited real estate and this results in accidents.

Could the lack of a KERS in Webber's car have a bearing on your opinion?

[safeaschuck]

Putting power directly to the crankshaft is the way of the future. Lookup turbo compounding, where you use exhaust gasses to spin a turbine that feeds that power mechanically to the shaft. No extra fuel needed like when a compressor pumps air into the motor. Free power. I think when the crank gets help spinning from another source, the compression isn't fought but the gas side can now do more for less. I think you only fight compression when you slow the motor.

O.K. Had a little look at turbo compounding, seems they pull pressure from the exhaust manifold during the suck/blowdown/intake stroke (is this when the exhaust valves are closed?), i.e. 1 of 4 possible strokes. Does this mean it would require individual collection from each exhaust port?

I think I'm getting my apples and oranges mixed up because as one cylinder is on a compression stroke, another is on a power stroke, and putting more energy in at the crank would give a similar effect to lightening the reciprocating mass, it would simply spin up more easily...(?) As you were suggesting Giblet.
Also in another of my oversights, a CVT between the two would not prevent this, it might look like the two units (petrol and electric motor) were situated in parallel but so long as both are linked to the wheels, geared to each other or at 1:1 ratio, then the kick from the Kers will always have an effect on engine load and the C.V.T would also increase mechanical losses compared to a direct to crank fixing. No wonder they did it the way they did.

Big whoops. Put it down to brain inactivity of late, and an urge to try and post something, anything, related to MechTech discussions.