2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Just_a_fan]

You need elaborate computerized braking torque control on all four wheels for eight torque sources to control the deceleration of the car in accordance with the break pedal signal and maximize the harvested energy.

ABS by the back door...

[strad]

A constant power ICE is something as theoretical as an adiabatic or isothermal cycle.

Why bother discussing what gearbox would apply to such engine?

Too Right! Hear! Hear!

[xpensive]

Perhaps just as relevant as discussing a 4000 kJ AWD KERS system, ten times what cost the manufacturers billions to develop two or three years ago. It simply won't happen, but intriguing to argue around, correct WB?

[autogyro]

The end game, is how you gaurantee to make sufficient energy available to harvest.
One coasting lap and you are back to zero.
Dont forget these systems are not plug and play.

[WhiteBlue]

You need elaborate computerized braking torque control on all four wheels for eight torque sources to control the deceleration of the car in accordance with the break pedal signal and maximize the harvested energy.

ABS by the back door...

I don't see why ABS has to come into it. If the control program is not designed to take action in an over torque situation a dual torque brake can block the wheels just as easily as a conventional program. As far as I know they will still have the MES SECU in 2013.

Perhaps just as relevant as discussing a 4000 kJ AWD KERS system, ten times what cost the manufacturers billions to develop two or three years ago. It simply won't happen, but intriguing to argue around, correct WB?

I'm pretty sure AWKERS will happen. Scarbs by the way has confirmed it. The details remain scetchy. I would doubt that billions were spent on the 2009 KERS system. And I would also doubt that the 2013 system will cost ten times that much. The manufacturers are developing the technology anyway. Mercedes will have an electric SLS and BMW a diesel hybrid with AWKERS. An interesting side note: The KERS system will have exactly 120 kW and the 1.5L L3 engine 120 kW as well. The battery system will have a weight of 85 kg and will handle 31 MJ usable storage capacity.

The end game, is how you gaurantee to make sufficient energy available to harvest. One coasting lap and you are back to zero. Dont forget these systems are not plug and play.

I'm not sure I understand your comment.

[machin]

Look, I know everyone has moved on, but please give me this one opportunity to just go through the whole power:torque issue one more time in a different way; if it helps just one person of 100 who read it to really understand how the two are related I'll be happy.

People often talk about brake power and torque as if they are two completely separate aspects of an engine. They are not. They are two different ways of discussing the engine's ability to do useful work (move our car)

The engine takes fuel, burns it and converts the chemical energy stored in it to useful energy at the flywheel. We can express the output rate of this "useful energy" in three basic ways:

kJ per second
Power
Torque x Speed

75 kJ per second is about 100bhp, or 100lbft @ 5250rpm, or 200lbft at 2625rpm, or 50lbft at 10500rpm.

I'm going to avoid using the terms power and torque since they're often misunderstood, I'm going to stick with the energy per second description.

We all know that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another.

The typical engine can only achieve its highest energy per second output at one engine speed. When we attach this to the differential and wheels this means the car will only be able to transmit this peak energy to the road at one road speed. We can change the road speed by changing the differential ratio or wheel size, but we can't change the amount of energy -it can't be created or destroyed remember.

A refinement to the system is that we can add selectable gear ratios between the engine and the differential. For each additional selectable ratio we add we allow the engine to transmit its peak energy output to the road wheels at an additional road speed. But we don't increase or decrease the energy output rate (because remember energy can't be created or destroyed). If the engine puts out 200 kJ/sec at the flywheel its still 200kJ/sec at the road wheels (neglecting any that has turned into heat along the way), regardless of the gear ratio or wheelsize in between.

This explains why the performance of a typical car is improved by having lots of ratios; it can have its peak energy output rate at lots of different road speeds -at low speeds for good acceleration, and at high speeds for good top speeds, but the gearbox doesn't increase or decrease the energy output rate.

But, if the energy output rate is the same why does my car accelerate quicker in low gears than it does in high gears? Since Kinetic Energy =(1/2).(mv^2) it takes a lot more energy to change the road speed of our vehicle at high road speeds than it does at low road speeds -even if we neglect air resistance (add in air resistance and it takes even more energy!). Therefore our car will accelerate quicker at low speeds than at high speeds for the same energy output rate.

Since energy output rate and power are directly proportional we can put this another way; 200bhp will accelerate our car faster at low speeds than it will at high speeds. That's just the laws of physics. Remember; What the gearbox has done is allowed us to have the same power output at a low road speed (hence high acceleration at low road speeds) as well as the same power output at high road speeds (hence high top speed), but it hasn't increased/decreased the power or the energy.

Stop here if you don't care about constant power machines!

A constant power machine puts out the same power regardless of its rotational speed, and since power and energy output rate are directly proportional it puts out the same amount of energy per second regardless of its rotational speed. If its energy output rate is 200kJ/sec at 12000rpm, its also 200kJ/sec at 1 rpm. Because of this ability adding a gearbox doesn't do anything (remember the gearbox doesn't increase or decrease energy output rate, and since the engine can put out its peak energy at any speed anyway, the gearbox's ability to change the output speed offers no benefit).

OK... I hope that helps clear things up.

[autogyro]

With just AWKERS as a method of energy harvesting, the amount harvested is dependent on heavy braking at maximum lap speeds. Any coasting laps, warm ups, saving fuel or tactical will not meet the storage requirements.

Controlling the on board energy application will become complex and difficult.

[WhiteBlue]

With just AWKERS as a method of energy harvesting, the amount harvested is dependent on heavy braking at maximum lap speeds. Any coasting laps, warm ups, saving fuel or tactical will not meet the storage requirements.

They start with full KERS and they should ideally have a mode that disables KERS output in coasting or warm up conditions. A button at the wheel will do it.

Controlling the on board energy application will become complex and difficult.

With dual torque mode and a switch off button I think it will be pretty simple.

[xpensive]

Look, I know everyone has moved on, but please give me this one opportunity to just go through the whole power:torque issue one more time in a different way;
...

Afraid that is a no-no, unless WB disagrees with me, which he rarely does, repeating Newtonian laws is rather pointless.

[machin]

... I think using energy to explain it is worth a try at least!

[WhiteBlue]

Afraid that is a no-no, unless WB disagrees with me, which he rarely does, repeating Newtonian laws is rather pointless.

I see gearboxes as a necessary piece of machinery. I see no reason why they should change other than gradually when the engine gets more torque and less rpm. The gearbox will simply be optimized for the new circumstances. Honestly I don't care how many gears at what gear ratio they will be using. There are much more interesting points to figure out.

[xpensive]

What is far more intriguing however, is how to harvest 4000 kJ per, lap, say 600 per corner, when kinetic energy being availabe in abundance, but how do you store and release the same quickly and efficient enough?

[xpensive]

... I think using energy to explain it is worth a try at least!

Not get me wrong, your input is educational and worthwhile, but to a receptive audience, not to entertain the trolls.

[donskar]

machin, good post. =D>

[WhiteBlue]

What is far more intriguing however, is how to harvest 4000 kJ per, lap, say 600 per corner, when kinetic energy being availabe in abundance, but how do you store and release the same quickly and efficient enough?

That is indeed the question that battery development has to find. If we go by the 120 kW BMW dual torque KERS system you need only 11 kg batteries to reach 4 MJ storage capacity. Nevertheless they install 85 kg batteries with far greater capacity to their hybrid super car. Is this done to get a decent electric only operating range or due to constraints with load/unload speed?