KERS CONTROL UNIT

[mx_tifoso]

I recommend reading the 'FAQ' section in the Williams link 'WhiteBlue' posted above.

[WhiteBlue]

My marketing nose tells me that this is a killer app unless there are hidden show stoppers. If this is seriously developed it could have a very significant impact on all automotive drive trains in the future. You avoid almost all fundamental problems of chemical batteries. Anything remotely competitive in the chemical field has a usefull life of 1000 full load cycles and less than 80% thermal efficiency. The only disadvantage of this thing is the need for a starter battery.

[Conceptual]

My marketing nose tells me that this is a killer app unless there are hidden show stoppers. If this is seriously developed it could have a very significant impact on all automotive drive trains in the future. You avoid almost all fundamental problems of chemical batteries. Anything remotely competitive in the chemical field has a usefull life of 1000 full load cycles and less than 80% thermal efficiency. The only disadvantage of this thing is the need for a starter battery.

Don't most cars come with one of these already? And I imagine that something like the 24V cordless drill LiPo batteries may be a simple solution.

[Conceptual]

Hi scarbs, do you have any information about the Williams KERS?
From what i know it uses a flywheel as a replacement for the batteries, and the system is electrical.
Thanks

Check out the Williams web site for their new comany on KERS. It has a very informative grafic of the system.

http://www.williamshybridpower.com/technology/

There is also a very interesting Flash video of the F1 system.

So, if you hooked a low HP motor (7000rpm) to this and had a 10:1 gear, you could use it as a gas powered electric generator?

This doesn't seem very complicated either. It seems that the MLC is nothing more than the micron sized ferrite particles found in ferro-fluid, mixed with a resin, and impregnated into carbon fibre.

The toughest part I would think would be building the reverse-hallbach array into the mold, so as the parts set, the electromagnetic array would line up the ferrite particles in the correct orientation.

For the output and efficiency numbers, I think this would be a very inexpensive and mass producable item. If a larger one could be made to produce 240V, 100A while driven by a small HP motor, Williams may become the richest F1 team in history for its sales to auto manufacturers...

Wouldn't that just be the return on investment that Sir Frank deserves?

[WhiteBlue]

Q: Will you have the same specification battery for each race ?
Bell: ''The charging cycle will vary from race-to-race when it's on the car but we're not doing different batteries for different circuits. We are having a logistical nightmare just making the one type of battery. Having several different versions certified would be a nightmare.''

''One of the biggest challenges is to intelligently monitor the charging and cycles throughout the battery life, where all of the cells – 60-odd of them – are all in the same state of charge. It's dangerous if you have one abnormally low or high. The electronics to monitor and control all that is an important part of it.''

In constrast these Lithium Batteries are going to be a nightmare in terms of management needs. Imagine to manage the loading of 60 cells individually. Apple does that for 8 cells in their most advanced computer. On top you have to manage the loading and unloading of the brake torque very carefully to avoid irritating the drivers.

[pipex]

Another important thing is that flywheels systems don't need cooling. And in case of a problem the flywheel destroys itself and don't go puff like that LiPo batteries. And they could have a pair of flywheels for the season instead of changing them every time like batteries. They are more reliable for energy cycling.
Flywheel is the way to go...
There is a rumour that some teams have batteries with special shapes to position them in appropiate places. Flywheels don't seem too appropiate to do this.
It could be possible that Williams is trying to sell this system to traditional auto manufacturers, i won't be surprised if we see this kind of systems in some time.

[ISLAMATRON]

Why does williams place the flywheel above the fuel tank, wouldnt it be better placed under the fuel tank as are the other teams KERS batteries?

[WhiteBlue]

I bet you it is CoG consideration.

[ISLAMATRON]

but by that line of thinking the flywheel has to be more dense than the fuel, so it would be more advantageous to put the flywheel below the fuel tank, plus the gyroscopic moment made by the flywheel would be less effective the closer it is to the Cog no?

I was an early believer of the battery solution but Williams is slowly winning me over. Are they the only team connecting the motor/generator to the gearbox? I wonder what type of cable they are using to transfer the energy from the motor/generator to the flywheel.(and how much energy it can hold by itself(extra energy storage) So has Williams definatly abandoned the pure flywheel design they were touting earlier?

[WhiteBlue]

but by that line of thinking the flywheel has to be more dense than the fuel, so it would be more advantageous to put the flywheel below the fuel tank, plus the gyroscopic moment made by the flywheel would be less effective the closer it is to the Cog no?

No, I would challenge that train of thoughts. The Flywheel has exactly the same function as the battery in the other cars. The rest of the system is the same except for minute details. And the Williams solution is the lightest. It follows that flywheels are lighter than batteries. And being almost exclusively made from carbon fiber composites they must be lighter than fuel tanks.

[scarbs]

I wouldn't take the detail locations of components from the Wiliams video that seriously. Just accept the clip as a general diagram of the components and their purpose.

[pipex]

Are they the only team connecting the motor/generator to the gearbox?

I remember reading somewhere in another forum (Atlas??, AFCA??) that Honda (RIP) was connecting to the gearbox too. The post said that Xtrac integrated the system in the gearbox casing, but i don't now if it was internally connected or it was only to hold the motor in place, dunno.

[ISLAMATRON]

but by that line of thinking the flywheel has to be more dense than the fuel, so it would be more advantageous to put the flywheel below the fuel tank, plus the gyroscopic moment made by the flywheel would be less effective the closer it is to the Cog no?

No, I would challenge that train of thoughts. The Flywheel has exactly the same function as the battery in the other cars. The rest of the system is the same except for minute details. And the Williams solution is the lightest. It follows that flywheels are lighter than batteries. And being almost exclusively made from carbon fiber composites they must be lighter than fuel tanks.

YEs the flywheel has the same function as the batteries but(BIG BUT HERE)the batteries can be placed nearly anywhere ballast formaly was and the flywheel cannot. The Batteries can almost be seen as ballast with the ability to store energy. The flywheel has certain size and shape whereas the battery pack can be designed to be almost any shape. With that said the entire flywheel component is not carbon fiber, the casing must be made of steel or possibly titanium, which is much denser than the fuel so ideally it should be placed as low as possible. And this says nothing of the gyroscopic moments acting on the chassis which are magnefied as the force is placed farther from the CoG.

[WhiteBlue]

No, sorry to object again. Williams are quite positive that the containment is very light and most likely composite design as well. The only metall parts of the wheel is the shaft for the bearings.

No, we make sure that the containment of the flywheel is specified to withstand the worst case failure, including burst. With the flywheel being 100% composite, with no rotating metallic components or magnets at a high radius (the flywheel has a steel central shaft), this means that the maximum failure load which the containment has to withstand is the crushing force of the carbon fibre, and not the load of a failed metallic disc travelling at high speed. See Safety Section for further details

[ISLAMATRON]

hmmm interesting, thanks for the info... will research more.