TERS : Thermal Energy Recovery System

[aussiegman]

So what are you actually asking here???

[Wideband mindeD]

IIRC the TERS allow a single turbine so no separate systems.

This is one of the main reasons why I think that a single turbo charger with an electrical CHRA generator/motor unit will be the system that is most utilised.

It has significant advantages from a packaging (weight & size), power output, robustness and thermal energy recovery standpoint as well as being a very mature and well understood technology (so cost effective). The primary issue has previously been the thermal insulation of the CHRA electrical motor/generator, however I have seen a number of systems where this has been mostly overcome.

I wonder if Williams can incorporate their flywheel into a system with the turbo... That might just be a HUGE advantage for Williams due to the amount of development that they already have in this unit.

[superdread]

I wonder if Williams can incorporate their flywheel into a system with the turbo... That might just be a HUGE advantage for Williams due to the amount of development that they already have in this unit.

Wiliams' flywheel is simply a system for storing electrical energy, and that is independent of where the energy comes from. And in that terms it is worse than batteries, because it has a very strict resulting it bad packaging and high CoG (in contrast to batteries that can be made thin and spread about on the floor).

Whatever storage they use they won't put it directly on the turbo (very high CoG). And they won't use their flywheel for storage, but batteries.

[Wideband mindeD]

I wonder if Williams can incorporate their flywheel into a system with the turbo... That might just be a HUGE advantage for Williams due to the amount of development that they already have in this unit.

Wiliams' flywheel is simply a system for storing electrical energy, and that is independent of where the energy comes from. And in that terms it is worse than batteries, because it has a very strict resulting it bad packaging and high CoG (in contrast to batteries that can be made thin and spread about on the floor).

Whatever storage they use they won't put it directly on the turbo (very high CoG). And they won't use their flywheel for storage, but batteries.

I'm pretty sure the MMC used isnt terribly heavy, and they are going to have to incorporate a MGU into the turbo to spool it up.

The flybrid technology downsized and fit into the turbo would simply replace the MGU, and it obviously is already designed to accept power to spin up, and convert that spin back to electricity.

I think if Williams isnt looking into this, they are missing a big opportunity.

[autogyro]

Chassis rules do not allow flywheel energy storage in F1.

[superdread]

I'm pretty sure the MMC used isnt terribly heavy, and they are going to have to incorporate a MGU into the turbo to spool it up.

The flybrid technology downsized and fit into the turbo would simply replace the MGU, and it obviously is already designed to accept power to spin up, and convert that spin back to electricity.

I think if Williams isnt looking into this, they are missing a big opportunity.

Just to clarify this:
Williams Technologies: a flywheel with integrated electric generator/motor, the only things coming out of it are wires, it is a storage for electrical energy
Flybrid Systems: a flywheel with an effective gearbox in front of it , there comes an axle out of it that can be integrated into the drivetrain => stores rotational energy

So Williams would have no use in mounting their flywheel at the MGU-H as it can't do anything with the mechanical energy. They could mount an electric motor/generator there and connect it to their flywheel system.
On the other hand with a Flybrid-like system, it could be mounted directly at the but then the heavy (in terms of heavier as an electric motor) flywheel would be high up in the car.

Also, my argument wasn't about how heavy the flywheel is, but rather that it is restricted in its form factor, it's bulky where in terms of CoG thin is better and it's not separable into multiple small pieces to spread around making packaging more difficult.

Last but not least, there needs to be a possibility to connect the energy recovery system to the drivetrain (for brake energy recuperation and using recovered energy to drive the wheels), and that would be rather hard with a simple flywheel. A solution would be to separate drivetrain and turbo system, but that severely limits both of them.

[Wideband mindeD]

i would integrate it betweeon the snail casings on the hot and cold side of the turbo unit. And I believe the flybrid is made of a magnetized MMC that will spin up if electricity is applied, and decelerate with an electrical load attached.

Maybe that was a different type of MMC electromechanical flywheel? I know i read a post early on about a few of them...

And all f1 cars can have flywheels, they just cannot use them for KERS. Actually, I'm kind of surprised that they dont use Laptop HDD sized flywheels for gyroscopic control.

[superdread]

i would integrate it betweeon the snail casings on the hot and cold side of the turbo unit. And I believe the flybrid is made of a magnetized MMC that will spin up if electricity is applied, and decelerate with an electrical load attached.

Maybe that was a different type of MMC electromechanical flywheel? I know i read a post early on about a few of them...

And all f1 cars can have flywheels, they just cannot use them for KERS. Actually, I'm kind of surprised that they dont use Laptop HDD sized flywheels for gyroscopic control.

Flybrid is a company with a product: http://www.flybridsystems.com/F1System.html
as is Williams Hybrid Power: http://www.williamshybridpower.com/#%2F ... e_flywheel.

The Flybrid system is just mechanical, whereas the Williams system is electromechanical. The first one is able to harness and reproduce the rotational energy of an axis, the second can only store electrical energy given through a wire.
So, the Williams and all electromechanical flywheels are useless for integration in the turbo.

F1 teams are allowed (under current regulations) to use purely mechanical flywheel systems for KERS. They just don't do it.
To measure turning rate (i.e. what a gyroscope is for) they indeed use some form of flywheel, be it mechanical (much smaller than a HDD), fiber optic or just a bunch of accelerometers.

[Wideband mindeD]

@Superdad

You said the williams flywheel stores energy when electricity is fed in over a wire.... That is exactly what I am saying. If they could put it between the compressor wheels on the same shaft it would be able to be increased in speed by applying electricity, and decelerated with a load, generating electricity...

Faster spool up, or reclaim electricity.

[superdread]

@Superdad

You said the williams flywheel stores energy when electricity is fed in over a wire.... That is exactly what I am saying. If they could put it between the compressor wheels on the same shaft it would be able to be increased in speed by applying electricity, and decelerated with a load, generating electricity...

Faster spool up, or reclaim electricity.

But then it would function like an electric motor. So what you propose is, that they use an electric motor with added inertia and weight (i.e. a flywheel)?

[Wideband mindeD]

@Superdad

You said the williams flywheel stores energy when electricity is fed in over a wire.... That is exactly what I am saying. If they could put it between the compressor wheels on the same shaft it would be able to be increased in speed by applying electricity, and decelerated with a load, generating electricity...

Faster spool up, or reclaim electricity.

But then it would function like an electric motor. So what you propose is, that they use an electric motor with added inertia and weight (i.e. a flywheel)?

I am rather sure that they are using electric motors to spool the turbo anyways, that is why I think WIlliams could really be ahead on this if they incorporated the flywheel into the turbo unit itself.

It may also help with any harmonic dampening at the high RPM that turbos spin.

[superdread]

I am rather sure that they are using electric motors to spool the turbo anyways, that is why I think WIlliams could really be ahead on this if they incorporated the flywheel into the turbo unit itself.

It may also help with any harmonic dampening at the high RPM that turbos spin.

So your flywheel idea is, just do add inertia to the turbocharger mechanism. It will slow down any loss of rotational speed, but also any gain of it. Without a coupling mechanism to the turbine-impeller axis this is all it can do.

What they could do is a mechanical coupling (gearbox) to said axis and the electric motor to exchange energy with other ERS parts, but that will be very heavy. So, the teams will rather just put an electric motor on top of the engine and the storage low down in the car (by it flywheel or batteries).

[Wideband mindeD]

I guess I may be looking at it incorrectly...

I see it as just another wheel on the turbo shaft (about 4 inches round), between the hot and cold side. It would have roughly the same diameter as the turbo impeller and exhaust turbine, and spin on the same shaft. To me, that allows you to NOT require the external electrical assistance that the rules allow. I think it would allow you to have far more precise control of the unit.

Even if its rotating mass is a bit more, it shouldnt really change the operation. By allowing a constant electrical input into the flywheel, i believe that you can negate the negative intertial effects by applying a set voltage to boost the exhaust power on the turbine. I am not sure of the efficiency, but this may be one of those places where you can use it like a closed loop KERS. IF you can input electricity to spool it up, use it to generate electricity during high exhaust output, and store it in a capacitor until the next electrical boost is needed...

Obviously, it would be tied into the overall charging scheme, but I can visualize what this unit would look like, and that would be VERY close to a OEM turbo housing. But, once again, it could all be a moot point if they are looking at adding clutches to isolate the hot from the cold side of the turbo, because any contraption to do that would be necessary to place right where I am picturing the flywheel...

[superdread]

I guess I may be looking at it incorrectly...

I see it as just another wheel on the turbo shaft (about 4 inches round), between the hot and cold side. It would have roughly the same diameter as the turbo impeller and exhaust turbine, and spin on the same shaft. To me, that allows you to NOT require the external electrical assistance that the rules allow. I think it would allow you to have far more precise control of the unit.

Even if its rotating mass is a bit more, it shouldnt really change the operation. By allowing a constant electrical input into the flywheel, i believe that you can negate the negative intertial effects by applying a set voltage to boost the exhaust power on the turbine. I am not sure of the efficiency, but this may be one of those places where you can use it like a closed loop KERS. IF you can input electricity to spool it up, use it to generate electricity during high exhaust output, and store it in a capacitor until the next electrical boost is needed...

Obviously, it would be tied into the overall charging scheme, but I can visualize what this unit would look like, and that would be VERY close to a OEM turbo housing. But, once again, it could all be a moot point if they are looking at adding clutches to isolate the hot from the cold side of the turbo, because any contraption to do that would be necessary to place right where I am picturing the flywheel...

You are proposing a weight fixed on the axis connected with an electric motor. The weight adds inertia, making the turbo slower to spool up. It is also slower to spool down, but the impeller (that is connected directly to the flywheel) creates so much "friction" that the rotational energy cannot be saved to the next acceleration in a meaningful amount.

Adding a clutch-mechanism between the flywheel and the axis could prevent losses, but would add weight and bulk where it is high up and rather cramped.

[aussiegman]

Putting the weight of a flywheel assembly on to the CHRA of the turbo will be extremely prohibitive in terms of weight, reliability, packaging, CoG, complexity as well as negatively affecting transient response and spool times for the turbine compressor assembly.

There are already turbo CHRA's that incorporate an electric motor/generator that can produce electricity and then recover that to keep the compressor spinning. So all that is needed is a storage device.

If William wants to use the separate flywheel storage system then it could be fed from a turbo CHRA generator as well as other systems such as the KERS brake recovery systems (where still legal).

The recovered energy can then be fed back to the CHRA motor and/or the KERS as needed.

The flywheel systems have a few advantages such as heat management, longevity, servicability etc (not always a huge concern in F1) and overall weight remains similar or lower than some battery solutions, especially as the allowable capacity increases.

However overall packaging as said is the biggest hurdle. As one homogeneous unit its weight cannot be optimised and it should sit on the centre line of the car for balance behind the driver, however this is where the fuel tank etc reside so compromises are required.

It could still be used as long as they can get an advantage in doing so over a bulky battery requirement as capacity increases or if limitations are placed on service life such as those that currently exist for engines and gearboxes etc (battery packs must last 5 races etc). I think it will depend on the weight of the unit vs storage capacity when compared to a similar sized battery solution with similar capacity and longevity.