TERS : Thermal Energy Recovery System

[godlameroso]

If you know the grip curve of the tire in question you could map the MGU-K to limit crank torque, they already do it under braking, after all how many times have you seen anyone who wasn't having KERS issues lock up the rear wheels? If you don't think the cars have a type of traction control I have some ice castles to sell you in death valley.

[Abarth]

Not allowed.

You have to adopt a monotonically raising torque with increasing torque demand, and cannot shape it according to the actual used gear (which would be mandatory to map the PU, in fact limiting the torque in the lower gears) . These are the main articles in the regulations:

5.5 Power unit torque demand :
5.5.1 The only means by which the driver may control acceleration torque to the driven wheels is via a single chassis mounted foot (accelerator) pedal.
5.5.2 Designs which allow specific points along the accelerator pedal travel range to be identified by the driver or assist him to hold a position are not permitted.
2015 F1 Technical Regulations 24/89 3 December 2014
© 2014 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile
5.5.3 The accelerator pedal shaping map in the ECU may only be linked to the type of the tyres fitted to the car : one map for use with dry-weather tyres and one map for use with intermediate or wet-weather tyres.
5.5.4 At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position.
5.5.5 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 4,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.045Nm/rpm.
5.6.7 Homologated sensors must be fitted which measure the torque generated at the power unit output shaft and the torques supplied to each driveshaft. These signals must be provided to the ECU.

5.5.5 forbids an intrinsic traction control, in case the driver doesn't alter pedal position (=torque demand) and the engine speed raises.

The torque at PU is always with MGU-K.

[Tommy Cookers]

deleted - brain fade

[godlameroso]

Not allowed.

You have to adopt a monotonically raising torque with increasing torque demand, and cannot shape it according to the actual used gear (which would be mandatory to map the PU, in fact limiting the torque in the lower gears) . These are the main articles in the regulations:

5.5 Power unit torque demand :
5.5.1 The only means by which the driver may control acceleration torque to the driven wheels is via a single chassis mounted foot (accelerator) pedal.
5.5.2 Designs which allow specific points along the accelerator pedal travel range to be identified by the driver or assist him to hold a position are not permitted.
2015 F1 Technical Regulations 24/89 3 December 2014
© 2014 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile
5.5.3 The accelerator pedal shaping map in the ECU may only be linked to the type of the tyres fitted to the car : one map for use with dry-weather tyres and one map for use with intermediate or wet-weather tyres.
5.5.4 At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position.
5.5.5 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 4,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.045Nm/rpm.
5.6.7 Homologated sensors must be fitted which measure the torque generated at the power unit output shaft and the torques supplied to each driveshaft. These signals must be provided to the ECU.

5.5.5 forbids an intrinsic traction control, in case the driver doesn't alter pedal position (=torque demand) and the engine speed raises.

The torque at PU is always with MGU-K.

So torque is measured at the transmission not at the crankshaft, so MGU-K can totally influence drive torque. It's not full blown TC, but it does help . In these regulations if something is banned, it just means that you can't directly do it, you can still do it indirectly. And it may not be as good as a full blown direct system but it's still better than not having it at all.

[bergie88]

I also think that feedback control on wheelslip is what makes the traction control as we know it from the past illegal. But when that is the only thing, I am sure certain mappings are used as a function of for instance grip level of the tires to control the power output of the drivetrain.

[Abarth]

[[...]
So torque is measured at the transmission not at the crankshaft, [...]

No, at the PU output too. Which is at the crankshaft, and includes MGU-K.

[godlameroso]

It says output shaft, the engine doesn't have an output shaft other than the crankshaft, and the clutch is splined to the transmission input shaft. I think the FIA would have said crankshaft if that's what they meant, typically we think of the transmission output shaft, as the output shaft. The gear ratios change the torque transmitted to the axle shafts anyway. The output shaft and driveshaft torque however should be equal.

[godlameroso]

Anyone think compressor surge could aid g-h action?

[Abarth]

It says output shaft, the engine doesn't have an output shaft other than the crankshaft, and the clutch is splined to the transmission input shaft. I think the FIA would have said crankshaft if that's what they meant, typically we think of the transmission output shaft, as the output shaft. The gear ratios change the torque transmitted to the axle shafts anyway. The output shaft and driveshaft torque however should be equal.

PU output is PU output and not transmission output.

[godlameroso]

Since when is power unit just the ICE?

[Abarth]

Since when is power unit just the ICE?

Who said this?

PU is ICE+MGU-K, but NOT transmission.

Again, if you want to shape torque map to the slip limit, you have to map the PU differently for each gear.
This is not allowed as per these rules, as the torque is measured at the PU output.
And this is, again, the MGU-K.

For brake by wire, things are different, of course, the BBW map has to be dependent of the actual gear.

But we are wide OT here, at the Thermal ERS

[Vortex37]

Not allowed.

You have to adopt a monotonically raising torque with increasing torque demand, and cannot shape it according to the actual used gear (which would be mandatory to map the PU, in fact limiting the torque in the lower gears) .
......snip.....edit out.....
5.5.5 forbids an intrinsic traction control, in case the driver doesn't alter pedal position (=torque demand) and the engine speed raises.

This issue was discussed back in May, in the main thread. I agree when you say that traction control is outlawed. But pseudo traction control can be a by-product of some other system. Any of the possible K motor-gen types, needs/can/will have the - power/speed/torque/current/voltage matrix, controlled for operation control purposes. This allows a non feedback pseudo traction control. This link, and this link, and this pdf, will give the direction of thinking.

[Tommy Cookers]

don't we all believe there will be some such effect ?
I don't see how any practical system of mgu-k control could be without such
it will occur anyway if only as a consequence of system stability
and without it there would be increased delay (to resumption of full torque) with gear shifting

of course this legal quasi-TC (and ABS) effect is limited by the mgu-k limits ie 120 kW power and 200 Nm torque
coincidence ?
and limited by the response time of the mgu-k

[autogyro]

It also accounts for the many of the front wheel lock ups caused by removing load from the front tyres using ABS/KERS.

[gruntguru]

What? How?