autogyro's Transmission Concept

[PlatinumZealot]

Sorry I didn't get the full name of ESERU. What is this gearbox like? Is it more dependent on the electronics, hydraulics(if any) or is it more of a new way of doing things mechanically?

[autogyro]

Sorry I didn't get the full name of ESERU. What is this gearbox like? Is it more dependent on the electronics, hydraulics(if any) or is it more of a new way of doing things mechanically?

I have already defined the unit, which is an Electric Shift Energy Recovery Unit.
It's primary purpose is as a multi speed stepped gearbox (7 ratios F1).
It has no hydro/pneumatics in basic form. It is a new way of doing things both mechanically and electrically.
The gear train fits inside a four inch cube, there is no clutch and it can be air cooled.

[autogyro]

I wonder if fi-eng has come up with anything close yet?
I hope his work remains reliable next weekend.

[F1_eng]

We will have to wait and see, it has proven to be reliable so far.

And no, we are not running KERS.

At present it is not in my best interests to spend time developing a system like your idea, perhaps future rule changes will mean that we have the opportunity to expand the scope of developments in various areas. I certainly hope so.

[autogyro]

We will have to wait and see, it has proven to be reliable so far.

And no, we are not running KERS.

At present it is not in my best interests to spend time developing a system like your idea, perhaps future rule changes will mean that we have the opportunity to expand the scope of developments in various areas. I certainly hope so.

Thank you for that fi-eng, it confirms my comment that Fota does not want Kers development to upset their monopoly on technology and their profits in the road car markets.
I wish you luck for next weekend. It should be a fun meeting with little at stake and a chance to race full out just for the hell of it.

[PlatinumZealot]

F1_eng.. Which one of the teams do you work at again? Mclaren? which area of the car do you specialise in?

[sticky667]

he just said they aren't running KERS, so you have a choice of 8 other teams.

and he mentioned earlier in the thread about working in valvetrain development.

[Richard]

it confirms my comment that Fota does not want Kers development to upset their monopoly on technology and their profits in the road car markets.

Eh? All it confirms is that he works for a team that is not MCL or Ferarri.


Also only manufacturing teams are running KERS and none of the independents, then that seems to run counter to your theory about manufacturer teams?

[F1_eng]

I don't work on valvetrain r engine develpoments at the moment, haven't done work like that for a while.
The only reason I disclosed the KERS is because it leaves 8 teams. I didnt say we weren't running it next year, just we weren't running it for the next race.

[ESPImperium]

A couple of weeks ago i bought this magazine from High Power media:



Mike Gascgoyne was talking about the Spyler/Force India F8-VIIB/VJM-01 quick shift gearbox they developed for it and its Ferarri 056 engine and he said that they developed a twin barrel cluch approach, where one barrel engages the higher gear overdrives it and then the other disengaged the lower gear when the higher gear has reached optimal velosity.

Ill try and get a scan of the bit up ASAP.

[riff_raff]

autogyro,

Based on your posted claims, I'll have to call b*llsh@t on you.

"I have already defined the unit, which is an Electric Shift Energy Recovery Unit.
It's primary purpose is as a multi speed stepped gearbox (7 ratios F1).
It has no hydro/pneumatics in basic form. It is a new way of doing things both mechanically and electrically.
The gear train fits inside a four inch cube, there is no clutch and it can be air cooled."

I design very high performance aircraft power transmissions for a living, so I think I know a thing-or-two about gears and bearings. Here's the issues I have with your claims:

-A geared transmission with 7 discrete ratios would require a minimum of 3 planetary gear sets, or at least 4 spur meshes on 3 shafts. In order to transmit the powers and torques required in an F1 drivetrain, there's no way that amount of gear and bearing steel would fit within a 4 inch cube.

-An electrical motor/generator device that was capable of handling the torques and absorbing the power losses required to synchronise the speed changes in an F1 drivetrain would itself be far more than 4 inches cubed. Even with the most high performance PM DC motor and solid state MOSFET controller technology there is.

-A geared transmission can be made very light and compact by increasing the pitch line velocities of the gear sets, for a given power level. But high pitch line velocity gear sets also have very high windage losses. So that's why this approach is not normally employed.

Regards,
Terry

[autogyro]

autogyro,

Based on your posted claims, I'll have to call b*llsh@t on you.

"I have already defined the unit, which is an Electric Shift Energy Recovery Unit.
It's primary purpose is as a multi speed stepped gearbox (7 ratios F1).
It has no hydro/pneumatics in basic form. It is a new way of doing things both mechanically and electrically.
The gear train fits inside a four inch cube, there is no clutch and it can be air cooled."

I design very high performance aircraft power transmissions for a living, so I think I know a thing-or-two about gears and bearings. Here's the issues I have with your claims:

-A geared transmission with 7 discrete ratios would require a minimum of 3 planetary gear sets, or at least 4 spur meshes on 3 shafts. In order to transmit the powers and torques required in an F1 drivetrain, there's no way that amount of gear and bearing steel would fit within a 4 inch cube.

-An electrical motor/generator device that was capable of handling the torques and absorbing the power losses required to synchronise the speed changes in an F1 drivetrain would itself be far more than 4 inches cubed. Even with the most high performance PM DC motor and solid state MOSFET controller technology there is.

-A geared transmission can be made very light and compact by increasing the pitch line velocities of the gear sets, for a given power level. But high pitch line velocity gear sets also have very high windage losses. So that's why this approach is not normally employed.

Regards,
Terry

You certainly seem to know a lot about gearboxes Terry.
Unfortunately not enough.
You are correct on the minimum number of gears sets needed to achieve the number of ratios in a F1 gearbox but you do not have anything close in mind as to the actual arrangement or operational methods of this system.
I state again that the geartrain of this unit fits into a 110mm cube.
The gears within this box are of a similar size and capability of those used in current F1 gearboxes, in fact the width is 12mm but I shall say no more. The pitch angle is less than in conventional use as there is no need for any side loads other than for noise control. However most of the time in use, each gear is not actually turning in mesh but is stationary relative to the next in train. In most operating conditions the gears are receiving no effects from windage.

If you wish to call bu--sh-t on anyone please take the time to access all the facts first, otherwise it just sounds like sour grapes.

[autogyro]

A couple of weeks ago i bought this magazine from High Power media:



Mike Gascgoyne was talking about the Spyler/Force India F8-VIIB/VJM-01 quick shift gearbox they developed for it and its Ferarri 056 engine and he said that they developed a twin barrel cluch approach, where one barrel engages the higher gear overdrives it and then the other disengaged the lower gear when the higher gear has reached optimal velosity.

Ill try and get a scan of the bit up ASAP.

This system is a twin shaft/clutch design which is more compact than conventional twin shaft but is still a torque absorbing layshaft geartrain with in this case two clutches. It is similar to prototype work done by Getrag two decades ago. The problems with it are mainly because of the complex integral design, which makes cooling and lubrication difficult. Two selector barrels are used as in advanced conventional twin shaft laygear boxes. One gear is disengaged as another on the other shaft (shaft in shaft) is engaged. It speeds up shifting at the expense of higher torque loss.

A scan would be nice. You can also ask Mike if he remembers the extensive discussion at Lotus with Tony Rudd about fluid magnetic viscosity control for hydraulic clutch packs and differential operation.
He may also remember the Lotus 88 and the meetings down at Elstree back then.

[alelanza]

This thread seems like an OK place to ask this, as i didn´t find it elsewhere.
I imagine f1 gears are spur gears right? and just how inefficient are helical gears in comparison to straight cut ones? I´ve always heard they´re less efficient due to axial loads/more friction, but i don´t quite know how much % we´re talking about here.
Thoughts?

[Jersey Tom]

If you wish to call bu--sh-t on anyone please take the time to access all the facts first, otherwise it just sounds like sour grapes.

Nah I'd think he's pretty spot on with calling BS on this.

Here's a fact: You don't have an ESERU, or whatever. No prototype. No test data. Just an idea. Not even an accurate description, nor a patent.

Until you have any of the above, it's just a bunch of hot air. Gets annoying having this thing referenced in so many threads.