RB Traction Control yin yang

[nacho]

I don't think traction control would make such a big difference.

Though modern systems can predict situations controlling slip before it happens, and be set with different settings for each corner. I have understood that in MotoGP they use a a lot of different sensor data (suspension, wheel speed, lean angle) and predictive algorithms.

[lio007]

Hi guys! Vettel's sound! -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DwXOPN7ZIM Webber's sound is "normal" ... why?

I was at the Hungarian GP this year, sat at Turn 6/7. I heard exactly this sound on both RB cars, even on the Caterhams.
But IIRC I couldn't hear it on every lap during the race.

[bonjon1979]

Remember as well the message that Rocky gave to Vettel to use up fuel when he was behind the safety car. Maybe they were burning more fuel off and that's what was causing the rasping sound?

[H2H]

Hi guys! Vettel's sound! -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DwXOPN7ZIM Webber's sound is "normal" ... why?

I was at the Hungarian GP this year, sat at Turn 6/7. I heard exactly this sound on both RB cars, even on the Caterhams.
But IIRC I couldn't hear it on every lap during the race.

I think this and the traffic is exactly what fooled Mr. Minardi in Singapore. I listened to a lots of footage and obviously the drivers are working on their buttons on their teams demand for good reasons. Depending on the strategy and the circumstances different settings prove more beneficial and soand if you add on top the drowning effect of the traffic you can easily get a false impression. With Vettel running away you can perfectly hear every detail while almost all the times Webbers car was stuck in traffic and it's sound was embedded within other screaming engines

It is key to keep in mind that the engines tend, as written before, to stop the rattling once the driver puts his foot down to accelerate, as it should. In this case the driver wants torque and he gets a great exhaust plume anyway so any cylinder cutting and off-throttle blowing would be most of the time nonsensical. Minardi has seemingly confused the rattling sound of the car under breaking and turn-in with the smooth screams under acceleration....


It is a shame that I could not go to the Hungarian GP this year. Happily with Spielberg we will have another GP not too far away.

[aussiegman]

As said before, having been in Singapore at the race, I thought (and so did those I was sitting with) that Vettel's car sounded different during the race vs qualifying and different to Webber's and the other Renault powered cars throughout the race.

It could simply have been a case of a new vs old engine, a different engine mapping, a new exhaust design....The list of possibilities is endless.

Personally I think RBR have done some serious work to get something that is a combination of various elements and not one thing (EBD, floor, possibly some KERS intervention etc) that is working within "allowances" existing within the regs which is where RBR and Newey love to work (evidence the previous torque maps RBR used).

My friends and I (who are all RBR fans) have for a while thought RBR might be using KERS as a system to limit torque as a way to explain why RBR have had so many KERS failures vs the rest of the field. Again, it is just speculation.

From where we are ALL sitting (including those on here and the educated F1 commentators) its nothing but interesting speculation on a very dominant performance.

[raymondu999]

How exactly does KERS help with traction? Honest question. Are you suggesting that they're reversing the KERS motor direction to hold back the forwards torque?

[Tommy Cookers]

How exactly does KERS help with traction? Honest question. Are you suggesting that they're reversing the KERS motor direction to hold back the forwards torque?

I shall be pleased to respond in a few hours, if no-one else has by then

[H2H]

How exactly does KERS help with traction? Honest question. Are you suggesting that they're reversing the KERS motor direction to hold back the forwards torque?

The question is not directed at myself but I wrote about it earlier. Sadly I do not remember when and where I heard it first:

KERS obviously has a considerable impact on the behaviour of the car under charging/braking. It is a variable teams have to play with and it allows to modulate the torque output coming out of the engine. I saw it mentioned quite a while ago and at least some teams seem to use it to get away with more exhaust gas for the aero benefit as kinetic energy of the engine gets skimmed of by the recovery system and is transformed electric energy. So KERS has certainly an influence on the effectivness of the EBD, how much is impossible to say from my chair.

In crude terms a recharging KERS could help the driver to produce an unknown quantity x of more exhaust gas compared to a car without it, as the driver can drive with more throttle as some of it gets transformed by the KERS. So the car the produces more downforce allowing for more traction at rear, pirellis permitting. I think skimming off torque going to the tyres gives the right mental picture.

The additional downforce from the stronger exhaust plume and the resulting grip allow the drive to use higher corner speeds and in general more throttle and so forth but with thankfully diminishing returns. So a driver has to be very good indeed at anticipating the downforce level of a car under the changing conditions to use the EBD to it's fullest extent. He has to trust the car and commit himself fully with that throttle. The difference between a driver who does that and a driver who ends up even a little short will be most felt in the very slow turns and twisty sections. Interestingly Rob Wilson praised the WDC after Singapore for his ability to anticipate what the car will do next.

I fully agree btw with assiegman:

From where we are ALL sitting (including those on here and the educated F1 commentators) its nothing but interesting speculation on a very dominant performance.

[Kiril Varbanov]

According to Autosprint, it's down to engine mapping - http://autosprint.corrieredellosport.it ... tel/10584/

An informed person shared with me that team bosses are already looking into the situation. I don't really know what is going to be the output, but let's see, that was the only line I've got.

[aussiegman]

How exactly does KERS help with traction? Honest question. Are you suggesting that they're reversing the KERS motor direction to hold back the forwards torque?

My friends and I were throwing this around earlier in the year. Engage the KERS generator at increasing resistances to limit engine torque seen at the wheels. We settled on a system that we termed an eletromagnetic torque management system.

The engine torque demand requirement is seemingly being observed (engine is producing the torque requested by the driver), it is simply the torque is being split between the KERS and the drivetrain. As long as the KERS unit observes the required limitations it should remain legal. Excess energy could be "bleed" off as heat and then heat is the main issue which may have led to the failures of the RBR KERS systems seen previously.

The kinetic energy recovery creates a resistance in the drivetrain which can be used to limit torque to the rear wheels. The upshot is increase exhaust energy as the engine is under greater loads on corner exit. Good for an EBD....

We were absolutely not certain, however we thought that there is nothing in the regs that would/could prevent the charging of the KERS system under acceleration. It is simply a kinetic energy recovery system. The how and when seemed indeterminate.

If you could cycle the charging on and off fast enough and at the correct frequencies and timing to alter the torque split between the drivetrain and the KERS system, you could possibly alter the torque seen at the wheels to your advantage.

Is it possible and would it work?? I have no idea!!! I'm not an electrical engineer and don't know for certain but it seems somewhat plausible if difficult. Maybe those more in tune to these systems may have a better idea.

[CBeck113]

Afaik, Cylinder cutting has been around longer than that, it's also useful to note the helmholtz effect chambers on the exhaust banks, I've read two theories about these, but one of them is that they hold gas in, once the driver lifts off, this excess gas is blown over the bodywork, I could be wrong, but a combination of the two is probably what makes this sound. As someone said, the Renault engine sounds like that in real life on most the cars.

The Helmholtz chambers cannot do this. They work by creating a standing pressure wave, since the pressure cannot travel anywhere but back the way it came. The engineers can set the wavelength by adjusting the length of the chamber. The idea is to tune the chamber to a certain frequency, increasing the pressure in the exhaust manifold to increase the exit speed. This results in a power increase for the engine in this [relatively small] rpm band.
The same effect is used to silent noisy hydraulic pumps, but the standing wave is calculated to be negative, cancelling the sound at the unwanted frequency.

I personally believe that RB is on the legal side of the grey zone with their "system", and I think that the throttle pedal control is the key to creating the downforce. This could be very much counterintuitive (staying on the gas pedal in the curve while KERS brakes the engine?), therefore letting the driver that "gets it" to be much faster than the other. If they were illegal then the protests would have been submitted long ago.

[turbof1]

If they were illegal then the protests would have been submitted long ago.

The issue at hand is that the other teams don't have any guarantees it is a throttle/engine map or perhaps a different solution. This isn't like DDRS or a hole in the floor; there is nothing visible on the car. You aren't going to get far when the main argument of your protest is "it sounds funny". The only thing teams can do is asking a clarification.

[Kiril Varbanov]

More on the 'saga':
I have contacted Ferrari's head of communication in regards to Vettels extraterrestrial abilities, etc.
The simple answer was: please talk to FIA. (I read this as: We have nothing in mind).

Since I know FIA does respond to certain individuals only, among which is not anyone from the technical community, I'm reading the tech reports after the race. Unsurprisingly, Vettel's car has been under thorough investigation. Nothing has been found.

During parc ferme the following has been replaced:

Car 01:         LHS exhaust temperature sensor
Car 02:         RHS rear HIU
                    RHS rear wheel speed sensor
                    RHS rear pullrod
                    RHS rear pullrod sensor calibration parameters

Full transcript here.

In regards to the sound: it has been also heard on Caterham cars on Monza - Tony Granato (http://www.f1sport.it) sent me the video.

What do you think of the Vettel's pace so far (the poll on the front page):

Legal - clever trick (Traction Control-like, KERS) - 22%
Illegal - Traction control-like module - 28%
Legal - aero supremacy, tire management, EBD - 32%
Rules gray area - 18%

[krisfx]

Afaik, Cylinder cutting has been around longer than that, it's also useful to note the helmholtz effect chambers on the exhaust banks, I've read two theories about these, but one of them is that they hold gas in, once the driver lifts off, this excess gas is blown over the bodywork, I could be wrong, but a combination of the two is probably what makes this sound. As someone said, the Renault engine sounds like that in real life on most the cars.

The Helmholtz chambers cannot do this. They work by creating a standing pressure wave, since the pressure cannot travel anywhere but back the way it came. The engineers can set the wavelength by adjusting the length of the chamber. The idea is to tune the chamber to a certain frequency, increasing the pressure in the exhaust manifold to increase the exit speed. This results in a power increase for the engine in this [relatively small] rpm band.
The same effect is used to silent noisy hydraulic pumps, but the standing wave is calculated to be negative, cancelling the sound at the unwanted frequency.

I personally believe that RB is on the legal side of the grey zone with their "system", and I think that the throttle pedal control is the key to creating the downforce. This could be very much counterintuitive (staying on the gas pedal in the curve while KERS brakes the engine?), therefore letting the driver that "gets it" to be much faster than the other. If they were illegal then the protests would have been submitted long ago.

My bad, but everywhere I have read, including here states that these were to gain a more constant exhaust flow and therefore more constant downforce at the back, which is what I based my post off.

[Traction]

More on the 'saga':
I have contacted Ferrari's head of communication in regards to Vettels extraterrestrial abilities, etc.
The simple answer was: please talk to FIA. (I read this as: We have nothing in mind).

Since I know FIA does respond to certain individuals only, among which is not anyone from the technical community, I'm reading the tech reports after the race. Unsurprisingly, Vettel's car has been under thorough investigation. Nothing has been found.

During parc ferme the following has been replaced:

Car 01:         LHS exhaust temperature sensor
Car 02:         RHS rear HIU
                    RHS rear wheel speed sensor
                    RHS rear pullrod
                    RHS rear pullrod sensor calibration parameters

Full transcript here.

In regards to the sound: it has been also heard on Caterham cars on Monza - Tony Granato (http://www.f1sport.it) sent me the video.

What do you think of the Vettel's pace so far (the poll on the front page):

Legal - clever trick (Traction Control-like, KERS) - 22%
Illegal - Traction control-like module - 28%
Legal - aero supremacy, tire management, EBD - 32%
Rules gray area - 18%

In your opinion then, does that settle any speculation of foul play on RB`s part?