Do F1 cars have an ancillary alternator?

[Big Tea]

Would it? an unmetered connection goes both ways, and a few components switch an alternator into a motor.

That's why I suggest it would be illegal, it's effectively a second mini K, either in GU-K or MGU-K form. Pretty easy to spot by the FIA I would think...

I doubt they would do anything banned in black and white, but they seem to find gray areas everywhere.

[AJI]

... they seem to find gray areas everywhere.

True, but there's a big difference between a 'subtly creative interpretation of the rules' and 'what exactly are you doing with that obvious part that's clearly driven by the crankshaft?'...

[Big Tea]

... they seem to find gray areas everywhere.

True, but there's a big difference between a 'subtly creative interpretation of the rules' and 'what exactly are you doing with that obvious part that's clearly driven by the crankshaft?'...

I mean things 'we' never consider. Not suggesting it for a second, but as example a pump that blows air over some component to switch flow. The best tweaks are always the ones we look at and think 'why didn't I think of that'

[Red Rock Mutley]

The debate over whether the cars have an ancillary alternator has been going on in some of the PU threads for a while.
My position is; why do you need an ancillary alternator when you have a K (as an alternator) and an H (as an alternator) and an ES (as 'unlimited' storage) and an additional 300kJ of storage external to the ES (as shown in the flow diagram below) for ancillaries? Thoughts?
...

I can see significant drawbacks in running a separate alternator system. Looking at the system as a whole :
- the alternator itself is a sizable piece of aluminium and copper
- requires cooling
- requires support componentry to convert the alternating current to dc and to regulate the voltage
- is not self energising requiring a battery

[Jolle]

I can imagine, with relative low power consumption during a race, that it will be done on a battery alone.

[saviour stivala]

Could we maybe compile a list of what would use power and how much would be needed?

Why? We already know that the vast majority of the electrical energy generated by the car is used by its own electric motors to propel the car, but I'll have a crack at it if you like.

We can exclude everything that can be hydraulically powered, so everything from high pressure pumps right down to throttle butterflies, the ERS covers the vast majority of heavy duty items including BBW.., so at a guess the ancillary items would be: ECU, Comms, Cameras..? The only item I can find a number for is the ECU, which is ~69W fully loaded. I assume telemetry would be covered by the ECU as would the steering wheel. Let's say 300W max...

But I don't think it is easy as that to pin down. What about things like power steering, even things like the drivers drinks bottle. lots of things that do not obviously come to mind.

Electrical power steering is not permitted.

[AJI]

Electrical power steering is not permitted.

I think we've covered that sufficiently saviour...

So, what's your opinion on whether the cars have an ancillary alternator?

[GrandAxe]

The MGU-K is already allowed to function as an ancillary alternator (of sorts) for the ancillaries (Art. 5.1.3). The energy diagram also shows that the MGU-K can receive energy through the ancillaries too. With such an arrangement, whether a team would need a separate alternator just for ancillaries seems doubtful.

[AJI]

The MGU-K is already allowed to function as an ancillary alternator (of sorts) for the ancillaries (Art. 5.1.3). The energy diagram also shows that the MGU-K can receive energy through the ancillaries too. With such an arrangement, whether a team would need a separate alternator just for ancillaries seems doubtful.

Yes, it does seem doubtful that the cars have an ancillary alternator.

To date, this question has been answered with one firm "no'', a few "probably not's", an "I don't know" or two, and only one "I think they do" (in another thread), so, no real conclusion. However, my position is a 99.9999999% NO, for the reasons stated in the OP, so right now I'd have to give it to the "no's" by the slimmest margin.

I do have to ask you why you would say it's doubtful that the cars have an ancillary alternator in this thread at the same time as posting the following in the Merc PU thread? I'm not trying to start anything, I'm just looking for clarification.

GrandAxe

An alternator can be used to directly drive the MGU-H. The rules only put a limit on mechanical connections to the H.

[NL_Fer]

A little Dc-Dc converter between the ES and 12v battery would be much simpler, reliable and easy to package.

[GrandAxe]

The MGU-K is already allowed to function as an ancillary alternator (of sorts) for the ancillaries (Art. 5.1.3). The energy diagram also shows that the MGU-K can receive energy through the ancillaries too. With such an arrangement, whether a team would need a separate alternator just for ancillaries seems doubtful.

Yes, it does seem doubtful that the cars have an ancillary alternator.

To date, this question has been answered with one firm "no'', a few "probably not's", an "I don't know" or two, and only one "I think they do" (in another thread), so, no real conclusion. However, my position is a 99.9999999% NO, for the reasons stated in the OP, so right now I'd have to give it to the "no's" by the slimmest margin.

I do have to ask you why you would say it's doubtful that the cars have an ancillary alternator in this thread at the same time as posting the following in the Merc PU thread? I'm not trying to start anything, I'm just looking for clarification.

GrandAxe

An alternator can be used to directly drive the MGU-H. The rules only put a limit on mechanical connections to the H.

There's really no discrepancy, the question on the other thread was more general, that's all.
The MGU-K is already connected to the engine and with some modification, can be used as an alternator (or DC source) to drive the MGU-H, even when deploying.

[AJI]

...

The MGU-K is already connected to the engine and with some modification, can be used as an alternator (or DC source) to drive the MGU-H, even when deploying.

With no modification.

[Jolle]

Oh wow yes!! The loophole!!

The energy transfer to and from the K to the ES is regulated and how much the K unit can produce. Not it’s capacity self. You can have two K units in a single housing and with more then the output in the rules, as long as you won’t drive them together. So you can drive K1 from the ES with a bit of power going from K2 into the H.

[AJI]

Oh wow yes!! The loophole!!

The energy transfer to and from the K to the ES is regulated and how much the K unit can produce. Not it’s capacity self. You can have two K units in a single housing and with more then the output in the rules, as long as you won’t drive them together. So you can drive K1 from the ES with a bit of power going from K2 into the H.

I was thinking switching one K rather than having two.
Still, I'd doubt you'd need this facility for ancillaries..? The ancillary draw is infantisimal compared to the ERS, and it has its own 300kJ buffer.

[GrandAxe]

Oh wow yes!! The loophole!!

The energy transfer to and from the K to the ES is regulated and how much the K unit can produce. Not it’s capacity self. You can have two K units in a single housing and with more then the output in the rules, as long as you won’t drive them together. So you can drive K1 from the ES with a bit of power going from K2 into the H.

I've been saying similar stuff on the Ferrari hardware and software thread, but I don't think I've got engineers lingo (as a non-engineer).
You don't need two MGU-K's though, one will do; just set it up like one of those loony free energy dynamo/generators, only that the transferred energy drives the MGU-H constantly (as noted, path is unlimited).

The reason for this would be the huge gain in efficiency from diverting something like 20% of engine power, which the IC cannot apply to the tarmac at maximum torque (at standstill or low speeds), to an electric motor (MGU-K) which not only can, but can do it in very precise pulses to both avoid tyre slip and resonance. At slow speeds, the MGU-K should be able to propel the car forwards at as close to a 1:1 gear ratio as is possible (again, something the IC cannot acheive).

The benefits would be; the MGU-K driving the MGU-H almost constantly, better acceleration (e.g out of corners), tighter upper gear ratio's to keep engine RPM close to optimum most of the time, longer deployment times, better tyre management, higher top speeds etc.

The MGU-K would need some sort of modification to keep engine rotation pumping out no more than 120KJ. For instance, there might more than one stator for the purpose, or a single stator in which the coil length can be varied by connecting to designated points along its length.

Mercs quarrel about the legality of Ferrari's ability to deploy longer might come from the 120KJ limit on the K, but the rules do not specify a net max power; just max 120KJ in, and max 120KJ out.