Less torque to reduce tyre wear?

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Gatecrasher
Gatecrasher
4
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 04:54

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

bhallg2k wrote:
Gatecrasher wrote:I'm afraid you've misinterpreted the regulations. A team is not required to advance torque demand in 0.03Nm increments according to corresponding accelerator travel. The requirement is that torque must be output monotonically on a gradient that doesn't deviate more than 0.03Nm one way or the other.

Beyond that, just exactly how much torque do you think an F1 engine produces? 390Nm of torque would be a huge figure for an F1 engine.
I just read the regulations, my bad I did get it wrong :oops: The regulations state that the map must not have a gradient of less than -0.03Nm. Thus you can actually be flat to slightly negative torque for increasing RPM.

I do not however see anywhere in the regulations that it can't deviate plus or minus more than 0.03, only one sided. Also the curve only has to be monotonic during an increase in accelerator position. Thus if a driver plants his foot down fully the curve can do what it wants while the rev's are increasing as the throttle position is fixed, as long as it meets the -0.03 rule.

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

gato azul wrote:How do you know, that they can be done with a mechanical linkage, if you don't even know what it is/ have ever seen one?
I have asked on many occasions what a 'driver torque demand map' is and how it differs form a 'throttle map' that we often speak of. You will find the term 'accelerator pedal shaping map' also used in the rules. Can not say I have found 'throttle map' used. We are clearly not all on the same page when using these terms.

The Honda mechanical throttle system system was a cam following system. The slot the cam travelled in looked similar to the black line in the graph we have been discussing. With the turbo it was all about adding better 'feel' in that zone when the turbo really kicks in.

Brian

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

Gatecrasher wrote:I just read the regulations, my bad I did get it wrong :oops: The regulations state that the map must not have a gradient of less than -0.03Nm. Thus you can actually be flat to slightly negative torque for increasing RPM.

I do not however see anywhere in the regulations that it can't deviate plus or minus more than 0.03, only one sided. Also the curve only has to be monotonic during an increase in accelerator position. Thus if a driver plants his foot down fully the curve can do what it wants while the rev's are increasing as the throttle position is fixed, as long as it meets the -0.03 rule.
You have to take the regulations as a whole.

The following defines the limits and direction of the line, so to speak.
5.5.3 The maximum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or greater than the maximum engine torque at the measured engine speed.

The minimum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or lower than 0Nm.


This defines the line's relationship to accelerator travel.
5.5.5 At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position.

This defines the line's slope.
5.5.6 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 5,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.030Nm / rpm.

You are correct that it doesn't specify any sort of +/- gradient deviation. That was my mistake.

However, the word monotonically does forbid deviations.

Gatecrasher
Gatecrasher
4
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 04:54

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

Thus curves can vary as long as the accelerator is not 100% fully down.

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

How do you read that from those regulations?

Gatecrasher
Gatecrasher
4
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 04:54

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

The reason I sumerized that is if you add in 5.5.3 it only states that max torque must be delivered at 100% accelerator position.

Curves can vary as long as not 100% and not increasing. So if a driver holds his foot at 90% open on an exit they could map to prevent wheelspin ?

I can now see why it took Renault a couple of hours to explain the rules to the FIA =D>

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

5.5.3 also states: The minimum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or lower than 0Nm. That's important, because it means the rule establishes both boundaries.

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

bhallg2k wrote: This defines the line's slope.
5.5.6 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 5,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.030Nm / rpm.

However, the word monotonically does forbid deviations.
5.5.6 defines a restriction to the slope of a 'given point' on the curve. It does not define a restriction to the whole curve. Thus the curve can resemble the black line in the graph above. It is a legal map.

Gatecrasher is correct.

Brian

gato azul
gato azul
70
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 14:39

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

The regulations state that the map must not have a gradient of less than -0.03Nm. Thus you can actually be flat to slightly negative torque for increasing RPM.
This is the important part to understand !!!
You need to understand, what negative gradient means in this context, and why it is in the regulations.
This is exactly the part, which prevents an (ab)use of creative mapping as "true" TC.
Because you would not manage, to regain traction on an wheel which lost it (as least not fast enough), if you only can reduce torque demand at -0.03 Nm/rpm.
Therefore it is not TC in the classical sense of the word.
I think "driveability aid" describes it better, you could say, that it reduces the "aggressiveness" of the torque delivery of the engine in a certain rpm range/band.
The shape of the underlying torque/power curve of the engine in questions, plays an important role in this - IMO

just an example, pulled from the web - so don't get hang up on the numbers, they are not important in this context.
The graph is just used to explain the underlying concept.

Image

as you see, this engine has a very distinct increase in torque/power at around 11500 rpm.
If you look at the power curve gradient, you see, that the gradient changes rapidly around this value, and later the curve resumes with an lesser (flatter) gradient, similar as it does before the specific rpm range in question.
In a limited traction condition, slow corner &/or wet track, this sudden increase in torque/power delivery can be enough to break traction at the wheels (wheel spin). To recover, the driver would need to lift off the throttle, or reduce throttle (pedal) input ( and thereby torque demand) in anticipation of the torque increase in this specific rpm range.
Now lifting the throttle is not good if you want to use the exhaust gas flow for something.

If you could manage to "flatten" the torque curve in the specific range, where you have a steep increase in torque/power, the driver would be able to keep full throttle without the "fear" of loosing traction, which would lead to an more stable exhaust flow.
But even without any additional benefit from exhaust gas flow, this is still an advantage, especially in low grip (wet) condition.
IMO, this could be the underlying idea behind it - but that's just my opinion - take it or leave it.

Anyone, who has ever driven an Honda VTEC, especially in a Type-R model, or an older style turbo car in the rain,will know what I mean.

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

hardingfv32 wrote:
bhallg2k wrote: This defines the line's slope.
5.5.6 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 5,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.030Nm / rpm.

However, the word monotonically does forbid deviations.
5.5.6 defines a restriction to the slope of a 'given point' on the curve. It does not define a restriction to the whole curve. Thus the curve can resemble the black line in the graph above. It is a legal map.

Gatecrasher is correct.

Brian
No, the rule says any given point, which effectively means every possible point.

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

Gatecrasher wrote: So if a driver holds his foot at 90% open on an exit they could map to prevent wheelspin ?
That is the myth in this whole discussion. The driver does not know he is at 90%. Sure, 90% could prevent wheel spin in a given situation, but the driver does not know where 90% throttle is? What is to prevent him from asking for 91% by accident and getting wheel spin.

This whole traction management idea is half baked. Better 'drivability', sure...

Brian

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

You only think it's half-baked because you flat-out refuse to see the issue any other way, no matter how many times someone explains it to you.

Gatecrasher
Gatecrasher
4
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 04:54

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

bhallg2k wrote:No, the rule says any given point, which effectively means every possible point.
The rules says any given point for an increase in accelerator position, if the accelerator position is constant this does not hold

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

...and?

hardingfv32
hardingfv32
35
Joined: 03 Apr 2011, 19:42

Re: Less torque is illegal? Red Bull WTF

Post

bhallg2k wrote:No, the rule says any given point, which effectively means every possible point.
This is not correct. The slope can vary at any point along the line, just not 'less than – (minus) 0.030Nm / rpm.' This means the slope could be vertical at some point if it was desired.

Brian