Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[beelsebob]

quick question. if a teams ERS fails (like kers sometimes do during a race now) wouldn't it be a massive disadvantage in 2014 onwards? reducing the engine power by about 200bhp (i can't remember exactly the bhp ERS is worth)

or am i miss understanding something

Correct. In fact, if they have any pit stops left, they'll be out... Of course, asking this question is a bit like asking "if a team's engine fails, wouldn't it be a massive disadvantage?"

KERS fail more often than engines IIRC

Better get that fixed on your car design then...

but being 200bhp (or whateva) down, you would surely have to retire anyway? you couldn't compete

Just like being 500bph down from your engine will cause you to retire.

[Tommy Cookers]

REPLACED (couldn't remember the proper way to do that)

[Pingguest]

thanks for the numbers, not a great look for the 'pinnacle of motorsport'

What is the value of a series with cars that constantly became faster? Such a series would be self-destructive, as safety cannot be guaranteed and the cars become physically impossible to drive. Besides, being the 'pinnacle of motor sport' does not only or not necessarily imply that the series has the fastest cars. Competition and skills are of great importance as well.

[Tommy Cookers]

deleted deleted

[Tommy Cookers]

right now KERS is a max power of 60 kiloWatts and a max energy release/lap 400 kiloJoules
that's how there is only about 6 sec of KERS motoring/lap

2014 the max ERS motor power is 120 kW (about 160 bhp), the limit on total recovered energy/lap is greatly increased
to 2000 kiloJoules from braking (stored) + 2000 kJ from the exhaust turbine (stored)
also energy from the turbine can be used directly on recovery, not stored
so the engine will operate much of the lap as a 'turbo-compound', the 2014 rules were written for this
unused braking recovery allowance (stored) can be traded for exhaust turbine recovery allowance (stored), this seems a likely choice

all ERS motoring must be a seamless, continuous, flow of power integrated with engine use throughout the lap
(with ERS alone in the pit lane)
the familiar bursts of power associated with KERS have gone
effectively it can add about 120 bhp to the engine power 'for free' (in energy terms)

CORRECTED VERSION !

[WhiteBlue]

2014 the max ERS motor power is 120 kW (about 160 bhp) but the limit on total recovered energy is relatively much greater so the duration of ERS motoring will be longer.

What you call ERS motor power should be called the MGU-K power limit in motor mode. It is indeed limited to 120 kW in 2014. There is no such thing as ERS motoring unless you refer to the electric driving in the pit lane. The MGU-K drive power will continuously be fed into the engine drive power by the power management system according to the drivers throttle pedal setting and the parameters of its programming. Push to pass KERS will be prohibited.

so the ERS motoring could be semi-continuous use of turbine recovered power (maybe 40 kW) with added bursts from stored power that was recovered under braking, roughly equivalent to 10% of the main engine power ?

The electric component of the total power train power in 2014 should be more than 10%. I expect that closer to 20% than 10%.

[Tommy Cookers]

I came up with 120 bhp equivalent addition to engine power (not 120 bhp continuous) finally
IMO we won't see this in 2014

I had already corrected my basic post (made trying to help, posts talking about 200 bhp)

you were/are suggesting no more brake recovery than at present ?
(IMO your figs in consequence suggest a seriously big recovery from the turbine)
this would also be difficult when the fuel rate is reduced

the rules seem (reasonably) to test the balance between turbine and piston

BTW how long before they re-invent 'push-to-pass' ?

[WhiteBlue]

..(IMO your figs in consequence suggest a seriously big recovery from the turbine)
this would also be difficult when the fuel rate is reduced..

I have kicked some numbers around with Ringo and expensive in the turbo expert thread. We came to the conclusion that the engine plus the electric power would match the 750 bhp figure of the current engines. Everything that was published about the 2014
power trains seems to support this estimate. I will bring up the thread to go over those numbers if you want.

[stfn_ger]

@WhiteBlue:

So, if I get all things right, the MGU-K won't be a push-to-pass system anymore but continuously supporting the ICE depending on the position of the throttle pedal, while the MGU-H is supporting the exhaust turbine of the turbo to prevent such things as turbo-lag ? If so, how is the power output by both systems being controlled ? Will they have their own kinds of mappings in the ECU ?

EDIT: Another thing i wanted to ask ( Sorry if someone else already came up with this ):
In the 2014 technichal regulations, they changed the paragraph that rules the anti-stall system. The current one reads as follows:

5.19 Stall prevention systems :
If a car is equipped with a stall prevention system, and in order to avoid the possibility of a car
involved in an accident being left with the engine running, all such systems must be configured
to stop the engine no more than ten seconds after activation.
The sole purpose of such systems is to prevent the engine stalling when a driver loses control
of the car. If the car is in second gear or above when the system is activated multiple gear
changes may be made to either first gear or neutral, under all other circumstances the clutch
alone may be activated.
Each time such a system is activated the clutch must be fully disengaged and must remain so
until the driver de-activates the system by manually operating the clutch with a request
greater than 95% of the total available travel of the drivers clutch actuation device.

The entire italic - marked section has completely been dropped for the 2014 regulations. So, if I'm not mistaken, teams are now allowed to run an anti-stall system for purposes other than the one mentioned above. I was thinking about some kind of a launch control, where the driver just releases the clutch instantly at the start. Normally, the engine would stall now, but with an altered anti - stall system, the engine could fall back on a torque - optimized motor mapping and it would be completely legal imo. Any thoughts on that ?

[WhiteBlue]

.. how is the power output by both systems being controlled ? Will they have their own kinds of mappings in the ECU ?

I'm not an expert on engine systems. My experience is more based on machine tool drive systems which have also been a mixture of electrics and hydraulics in the past. So I'm used to hybrid systems for a long time. I would think that the power is controlled by similar means as the braking torque is on the current F1 machinery. They have to mesh the pedal torque demand to the brake disks and the KERS MGU. It is done by some clever mapping in the SECU and by some hydraulic tricks I assume. The driver probably has some influence with steering wheel settings. Comes 2014 they will have to make it more sophisticated and have to control it entirely by one pedal and the SECU programming. Btw. I have read in RaceCar Engineering that F1 will be having new SECUs from 2013. They should be much more powerfull in terms of real time data processing and bus standards. I do not know the details because I am not a subscriber and only read the free preview pages. But there could be the successor of the old CAN bus system integrated which probably is based on an industrial Ethernet and would be multi server capable.

[WhiteBlue]

The entire italic - marked section has completely been dropped for the 2014 regulations. So, if I'm not mistaken, teams are now allowed to run an anti-stall system for purposes other than the one mentioned above. I was thinking about some kind of a launch control, where the driver just releases the clutch instantly at the start. Normally, the engine would stall now, but with an altered anti - stall system, the engine could fall back on a torque - optimized motor mapping and it would be completely legal imo. Any thoughts on that ?

I think the purpose is different. You have to consider that the MGU-K will serve as an on board electric starter from 2014. So stall prevention will not matter much if you can simply restart the engine.

[stfn_ger]

I think the purpose is different. You have to consider that the MGU-K will serve as an on board electric starter from 2014. So stall prevention will not matter much if you can simply restart the engine.

That i understood, but it wasn't exactly my point. I much rather asked myself, if this could be a loophole to abuse a stall prevention system for a purpose like I mentioned above, since the rules clearly allow an anti - stall system but drop the part where they limit it to it's "sole purpose". I'm not entirely done with thinking about it ( escpecially if this idea would be in accordance with the other rules ) but i figured you guys could shed some light on my thoughts ...

[WhiteBlue]

I'm not an expert in the field of rule exploitation but I have long experience in observing how the FiA plugs loop holes in the system. There is very little doubt that the use of driver aid electronic gimmicks will remain prohibited in 2014. If there is a tendency for launch control and other stuff to creep back I am confident that the teams and the FiA will act swiftly to plug such holes. So I'm not giving it much thought.

[turbof1]

thanks for the numbers, not a great look for the 'pinnacle of motorsport'

What is the value of a series with cars that constantly became faster? Such a series would be self-destructive, as safety cannot be guaranteed and the cars become physically impossible to drive. Besides, being the 'pinnacle of motor sport' does not only or not necessarily imply that the series has the fastest cars. Competition and skills are of great importance as well.

That's the problem: between 2000 and now cars generally have become slower instead of faster. The FIA banned consistently area's of development. For 2014 rules will become even more stringent. So we have slower cars with less methods of developing. In the end F1 will end up being like GP2: a development-sterile series.

[Ogami musashi]

You can have challenge driving slower cars for sure, but for the vast majority of its history F1 cars have been the fastest cars on a track (and often by a large margin) and speed brings difficulty, so i'm a bit sceptical of 2014 aero rules and think it is sad cars were not maintened to 2004 levels. I recently browsed back F1 rejects interviews, not one driver when asked is favourite type of car answered anything else than "single seaters, F1 cars" with justification that "you can't attack as much with other cars".

I think the problem for the FIA is that they can't control de performance as much as spec series so they're stuck between allowing development and constraining performance. The ground effects plans were good, it was a near spec floor, would have made the car quick enough and yet the developments would still be engine oriented; But no..teams refused it and now if the current regs are finalized we'll end up with monza levels of downforce at monaco...