2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[dren]

But the restriction is in the 120kW max you can send from the MGUK to the ES and the time braking you have to do it. I'd guess then you'd spec your battery accordingly.

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.motorsport-magazin.com/forme ... ult-motor/
The report says explicitly that the battery weight is 35 kg.

...kommt der neue 1,6-Liter-V6-Turbo auf ein Gewicht von 145 Kilogramm. Hinzu addieren sich weitere 35 Kilogramm für die Batterie ....
translation:
...the new 1.6-Liter turbo reaches a weight of 145 kg. On top you have 35 kg for the battery....

[wuzak]

Teams are likely to use a combination of supercaps and batteries as Red Bull are already doing

Yeah, because Red Bull's KERS is so successful now.

btw, the maximum storage (max charge - min charge) is 4MJ. It doesn't specify a minimum.

What's to say that a team may forego the full storage amount in favour of packaging and reducing heat load - the Red Bull way?

Why would they use less? Look at it this way, with a higher allowance for discharging to the MGUK, they can use it nore continuously. So the 2MJ/4MJ could be used over a lap without ever needing to store that amount.

The flywheel system used in the Porsche 911 GT3 R has a capcity on 0.72MJ. That may be on the small side. Another flywheel system I have seen specs of, can't find it now, was 1.3MJ storage. That could, possibly, be enough. If you are using the energy soon after you store it.

[WhiteBlue]

Red Bull are not the only team to use supercaps successfully. The best energy storage system in LMP1 at the moment comes from Toyota. They use supercaps only. No idea how heavy this system is but it has obviously no limit regarding charging and depletion rates.

[wuzak]

Red Bull are not the only team to use supercaps successfully. The best energy storage system in LMP1 at the moment comes from Toyota. They use supercaps only. No idea how heavy this system is but it has obviously no limit regarding charging and depletion rates.

Of all the teams, Red Bull's system is the most unreliable.

And quite possibly the least effective.

[WhiteBlue]

Red Bull are not the only team to use supercaps successfully. The best energy storage system in LMP1 at the moment comes from Toyota. They use supercaps only. No idea how heavy this system is but it has obviously no limit regarding charging and depletion rates.

Of all the teams, Red Bull's system is the most unreliable.
And quite possibly the least effective.

It is obvious that they have reliability problems with the system. That does not say anything about the weight efficiency and the CoG of their system. It is believed that supercapacitors can be applied in very thin films to the floor of the car where they are at the lowest possible position and contribute to a very low CoG. Recent break throughs in energy density of supercapacitors would make it unnecessary to use a combination of supercaps and batteries as Red Bull apparently do today.

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/63027

This thesis presents vertical carbon nanotubes-based electrodes designed to achieve, when packaged into an ultracapacitor cell, a four to seven times higher power density (7.8 kW/1) and a five times higher energy density (31 Wh/1) than those of activated carbon-based ultracapacitors.

Supercapacitors are also said to have very much higher power densities than battery cells. They are capable of absorbing recovered braking energy 7 times faster per kg than iron/phosphate A123 batteries that are believed to be currently used in F1. You get 88 Wh/kg energy density and 1.132 KW/kg power density from A123 batteries, according to PDF here

By my calculation you can use 15.4 kg of this supercap material to absorb 120 kW of the MGU-K under braking. You can store 1.74 MJ in one braking event with that capacitor.

Today Red Bull would probably install 19.6 kg of A123 cells to fill the gap to the 4 MJ capacity needed for qualifying. They would end up with more than 4 MJ due to the high energy capacity of the cells but would need the full 19.6 kg to back up the super cap storage with the slower cells for a 70 kW power supply in qualifying.

If you use the new supercap material only in order to cover the whole capacity of 4MJ you need to use 35.8 kg. That would make for a much simpler and probably more reliable system. QED

[wuzak]

They would end up with more than 4 MJ due to the high energy capacity of the cells but would need the full 19.6 kg to back up the super cap storage with the slower cells for a 70 kW power supply in qualifying.

They can't have more than 4MJ storage - it's in the rules.

As is the required location of the ES. So they can't just be spreading it out all over the car.

QED? Yours is supposition, not a proof.

[wuzak]

And the fact remains that Red Bull's KERS has been the least reliable and, possibly, the least effective of the period since the reintroduction in KERS (2011).

[WhiteBlue]

They would end up with more than 4 MJ due to the high energy capacity of the cells but would need the full 19.6 kg to back up the super cap storage with the slower cells for a 70 kW power supply in qualifying.

They can't have more than 4MJ storage - it's in the rules.

As is the required location of the ES. So they can't just be spreading it out all over the car.

QED? Yours is supposition, not a proof.

You can have any size storage you want. Perhaps you do not see the relevance of the power density figures of battery cells. They require you to have more than 4 MJ in order to charge sufficiently. The rule says you cannot use more than 2MJ/4MJ per lap. It does not stop you to install whatever your power density requires you.

Where does it say that you cannot have a capacitor in the floor?

I reckon I will rather have a 35.8 kg supercaps only ES than a combined supercaps/battery of 35 kg. That was the thing to be demonstrated by the figures.

[WhiteBlue]

And the fact remains that Red Bull's KERS has been the least reliable and, possibly, the least effective of the period since the reintroduction in KERS (2011).

So what? They also had the fastest car most of the time. So they must be doing something right.
Newey: It is easier to make a fast car reliable, than to make a reliable car faster.

[wuzak]

And the fact remains that Red Bull's KERS has been the least reliable and, possibly, the least effective of the period since the reintroduction in KERS (2011).

So what? They also had the fastest car most of the time. So they must be doing something right.
Newey: It is easier to make a fast car reliable, than to make a reliable car faster.

So what?

The KERS in the RBR is as small and least impact to the aero as possible. That's why RBR have been so successful. It is also true that given a choice RBR wouldn't have used KERS, except that they would be losing too much time (~0.4s per lap).

It is illogical, therefore, to expect teams like Ferrari and McLaren, who have superior KERS, to follow RBR's example.

Also, while it is generally true that making a fast car reliable is easier than making a reliable car fast, I don't think it really applies to 2014 F1.

If your ERS is unreliable you will be leaving seconds on the table - not fractions of a second.

Good for RBR that Renault will be doing almost all of the ERS for them - except, maybe, the energy store. Newey has already bitched that the 2014 regulations tell him where to put that.

[wuzak]

They would end up with more than 4 MJ due to the high energy capacity of the cells but would need the full 19.6 kg to back up the super cap storage with the slower cells for a 70 kW power supply in qualifying.

They can't have more than 4MJ storage - it's in the rules.

As is the required location of the ES. So they can't just be spreading it out all over the car.

QED? Yours is supposition, not a proof.

You can have any size storage you want. Perhaps you do not see the relevance of the power density figures of battery cells. They require you to have more than 4 MJ in order to charge sufficiently. The rule says you cannot use more than 2MJ/4MJ per lap. It does not stop you to install whatever your power density requires you.

Where does it say that you cannot have a capacitor in the floor?

I reckon I will rather have a 35.8 kg supercaps only ES than a combined supercaps/battery of 35 kg. That was the thing to be demonstrated by the figures.

The rules state that the difference between maximum charge and the minimum charge can be no more than 4MJ. You can have any size that you want, so long as it fits that limit. So you will have more than 4MJ maximum capacity because you won't want 0MJ at full discharge (ie battery is dead).

The rules state:
5.4.3 The total weight of the part of the ES that stores energy, i.e. the cells (including any clamping plates) and electrical connections between cells, must be no less than 20kg and must not exceed 25kg.
5.3.6 The ES must be installed wholly within the survival cell.
5.2.2 Energy flows, power and ES state of charge limits are defined in the energy flow diagram shown in Appendix 3 of these regulations.
When the car is on the track a lap will be measured on each successive crossing of the timing line, however, when entering the pits the lap will end, and the next one will begin, at the start of the pit lane (as defined in the F1 Sporting Regulations).
ES state of charge cannot increase whilst car is in the pit lane or garage during the qualifying session.
Measurements will be taken at the input to and the output from the ES.
A fixed efficiency correction of 0.95 will be used to monitor the maximum MGU-K power.

In the Power Unit Energy Flow Diagram it states:
Energy Store (ES)
(Art 1.27)
The difference between the maximum and minimum state of charge of the ES may not exceed 4MJ at any time the car is on the track.

[WhiteBlue]

Thank you for clearing this up. So you cannot have a part of the ES in the floor anymore. That point is true.

But it is still true that you can install 40 MJ ES if your power density is too low to allow you to use only 4 MJ. And that is the point really. Until now teams have been forced to install much bigger KERS batteries than 0.4 MJ in order to use the full 60 kW of brake energy harvesting that hey can do.

Next year it gets worse because you can use 120 kW to harvest 2 MJ. Your power density has gone up five times. The brand new ultra capacitors have a higher power density than required and their energy density is almost good enough to design a 4 MJ ES with 35 kg of mass. The A123 battery cells do not have the necessary power density. Their energy density is higher than required, but in order to reach the charging rate (power density) you are forced to install an over capacity of the cells or a partial capacity from super capacitors as Red Bull did. Do the math for yourself! I have given you all the data you need.

[wuzak]

Thank you for clearing this up. So you cannot have a part of the ES in the floor anymore. That point is true.

It is.

But it is still true that you can install 40 MJ ES if your power density is too low to allow you to use only 4 MJ. And that is the point really. Until now teams have been forced to install much bigger KERS batteries than 0.4 MJ in order to use the full 60 kW of brake energy harvesting that hey can do.

Energy density is energy per unit mass, so bears little relevance to the 4MJ minimum to maximum charge regulation.

I would think that discharging batteries to 0 energy stored would not be a good thing - especially if it is done frequently. And if teams were to use a flywheel, it would be impossible to do such a thing.

Flywheels, like capacitors, aren't ideal for road going electric vehicles because they can't store energy for long periods. But they will work in racing, because of frequent charging and discharging at high power rates.

Next year it gets worse because you can use 120 kW to harvest 2 MJ. Your power density has gone up five times.

Again, power density is per unit mass. SO the power density will stay roughly the same, unless leaps have been made in battery technology.

The brand new ultra capacitors have a higher power density than required and their energy density is almost good enough to design a 4 MJ ES with 35 kg of mass.

35kg is too heavy. The rules require an ES of between 20kg and 25kg in mass. I even bolded that part for you.

In any case, due to the nature of the 2014 power unit and the way it is likely to be used, it is unlikely you would need 4MJ of storage. And certainly in qualifying, if you are charged up to the full 4MJ, there is nowhere to stick recovered braking energy, until some is used from the ES - but you can't use that recovered energy to power the car.

The A123 battery cells do not have the necessary power density. Their energy density is higher than required, but in order to reach the charging rate (power density) you are forced to install an over capacity of the cells or a partial capacity from super capacitors as Red Bull did. Do the math for yourself! I have given you all the data you need.

Did Red Bull use capacitors? Or just stick their batteries in out of the way places?

[wuzak]

It is obvious that they have reliability problems with the system. That does not say anything about the weight efficiency and the CoG of their system. It is believed that supercapacitors can be applied in very thin films to the floor of the car where they are at the lowest possible position and contribute to a very low CoG. Recent break throughs in energy density of supercapacitors would make it unnecessary to use a combination of supercaps and batteries as Red Bull apparently do today.

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/63027

This thesis presents vertical carbon nanotubes-based electrodes designed to achieve, when packaged into an ultracapacitor cell, a four to seven times higher power density (7.8 kW/1) and a five times higher energy density (31 Wh/1) than those of activated carbon-based ultracapacitors.

You failed to quote this bit:

However, today's ultracapacitors are limited by their low energy stored per unit of volume and weight (5% that of a lithium ion battery), and their high cost (ten times greater than that of lithium ion batteries) per unit of energy stored.

So, 5 times 5% would leave the supercapcitor at 25% of the capacity per volume and weight of a Lithium Iron battery?