Does anyone know if the power output for KERS is unified across all F1 teams?

[auto123]

Does anyone know if the power output for KERS is unified across all F1 teams?

[henry]

The regulations specify a maximum output of 120KW from the MGU-K. They regulate it at the input to the MGU-K controller and allow an input power of 126KW in the expectation that the controller/motor is 95% efficient.

[Zynerji]

The regulations specify a maximum output of 120KW from the MGU-K. They regulate it at the input to the MGU-K controller and allow an input power of 126KW in the expectation that the controller/motor is 95% efficient.

So a 99% efficient motor can go above 120KW output?

[henry]

The regulations specify a maximum output of 120KW from the MGU-K. They regulate it at the input to the MGU-K controller and allow an input power of 126KW in the expectation that the controller/motor is 95% efficient.

So a 99% efficient motor can go above 120KW output?

Correct.

More exactly the efficiency refers to the motor controller, the motor and the gear train that attaches it to the crank.

[Tzk]

In theorie yes, but one should assume that they won‘t reach these efficiencies. Even if gears, motor and controller are each 98% efficient, that‘d result in a total efficiency of 95%.

Gear efficiency of 98 to 99% should be realistic. Motor itself is probably around 95 to 97 too. And the controller is probably also around 95%. So overall 95...

[Zynerji]

In theorie yes, but one should assume that they won‘t reach these efficiencies. Even if gears, motor and controller are each 98% efficient, that‘d result in a total efficiency of 95%.

Gear efficiency of 98 to 99% should be realistic. Motor itself is probably around 95 to 97 too. And the controller is probably also around 95%. So overall 95...

Sounds like a place to spend huge money for minute competitive advantage.

It's the same F1 that we all know and love...

[BassVirolla]

Gear efficiency of 98 to 99% should be realistic. Motor itself is probably around 95 to 97 too. And the controller is probably also around 95%. So overall 95...

In case those numbers are right, in the upper cases leaves an efficiency near 91%, because the motor only gets profit of the net power of the controller. The same applies for motor and gear train.

0,99 x 0,97 x 0,95 = 0,91

9% of 126kw sounds like a meaningful number in F1.

[Pingguest]

Could anyone explain to me why the mgu-k is so much limited by the regulations, especially compared to the mgu-h? The latter is far less relevant than the former?

[Tommy Cookers]

because the MGU-K is chosen to be the car's second engine - they want car racing with some added gizmos
sustained PU peak power comes from the fuel rate limit plus the K power limit

if K power etc was delimited they could run an ICE for 95 min at 400 kw and variably motor the K at up to 1000 kw
that would be like 1000 kW FE

[Zynerji]

because the MGU-K is chosen to be the car's second engine - they want car racing with some added gizmos
sustained PU peak power comes from the fuel rate limit plus the K power limit

if K power etc was delimited they could run an ICE for 95 min at 400 kw and variably motor the K at up to 1000 kw
that would be like 1000 kW FE

That sounds awesome! Dat torque with no traction control would have epic corner exits!

[Tzk]

In case those numbers are right, in the upper cases leaves an efficiency near 91%, because the motor only gets profit of the net power of the controller. The same applies for motor and gear train.

0,99 x 0,97 x 0,95 = 0,91

9% of 126kw sounds like a meaningful number in F1.

To clarify this: i guessed these numbers based on realworld numbers. 98-99% efficiency for straight cut gears is a common value.

The 97 and 95 are also purely based on guessing and common values. Al you pointed out, for total efficiency you got to multiply all efficiencies, what further brings them down. If you‘d want 95% total efficiency each of the three components should be at least 98.3% efficient (0.98^3 = 0.95).

I‘d assume that all teams are trying to to reach this and thus invest huge amounts of money.

[auto123]

Thankyou for all your responses!

[voice_of_reason]

Interesting.

[Ringleheim]

In theorie yes, but one should assume that they won‘t reach these efficiencies. Even if gears, motor and controller are each 98% efficient, that‘d result in a total efficiency of 95%.

Gear efficiency of 98 to 99% should be realistic. Motor itself is probably around 95 to 97 too. And the controller is probably also around 95%. So overall 95...

Sounds like a place to spend huge money for minute competitive advantage.

It's the same F1 that we all know and love...

The regulations are such that the only real area to explore for performance gains is in the wind tunnel. So we have teams spending huge amounts of time and money making and refining aerodynamic bits to put on an F1 car, which has zero utility beyond the objective of making an F1 car go a tiny bit faster.

That's stupid! If the regs allowed for unlimited engine development, all the money would be going there, but at least that would trickle down into your new Mercedes C Class' engine after a while.