F1 Technologies

A place For General Chit Chat Etc
User avatar
Jayme
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:59 am
Location: North Coast, NSW

F1 Technologies

Post by Jayme »

was just reading up on the Merc winning by over 30 seconds and how other teams want rules changed to make it more competitive. came across this:
http://www.mercedesamgf1.com/en/car/pu106a-hybrid/


totally boggles the mind.... imagine the computer control required to keep all those systems in sync.... no more turbo wastegate... lets put a generator on the shaft and when the boost pressure is too high, just pull more power from the generator to bring shaft speed down.... in the rules.... no limits on how much energy you can recover from the turbo and put in your energy storage, thats probably a big reason they are so much faster.
immortality
Posts: 3678
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:31 pm
cars: VH, VN, VS, VX

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by immortality »

Yep, amazing technology, unfortunately it sounds like crap.

Mercedes have definitely a much more optimised power unit than the other teams.

I'm not certain but I think that all teams are limited how much they can alter/develop their power units from the original design, basically put, once it was designed and built it's what you have and are stuck with until the next power unit evolution. Merc have an advantage until such time occurs.

I think it all comes back the cost saving initiatives, if teams aren't developing engines through the whole season you're saving money.

It's all quiet interesting because they are also limited in how much fuel they can burn during a race so engine mapping becomes very important in conjunction with kinetic energy use/recovers and heat energy recovery and getting it all to work together. Limited fuel usage means you can't just keep dumping fuel/heat into the turbo to increase heat energy recovery.

edit:It gets even more interesting when you think that it also involves the braking system, the kinetic energy recovery system works in conjunction with the rear brakes but you also need to maintain brake balance. One has to wonder how the rear brakes function is controlled when you have both the more traditional brake rotor/calliper as well as the kinetic energy recovery system which must all be balanced with the front brakes to maintain an over braking balance between the front and rear wheels.

Kinda interesting thinking about it, you could use a limited size kinetic energy recovery system and have to let the traditional brakes do the rest (to maintain over all brake balance) or more interesting would be to have a smaller traditional brake package in the rear and a much larger kinetic energy recovery system and any excess electrical load in excess of the rule limit is wasted as heat.....
User avatar
antus
Site Admin
Posts: 9018
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:34 pm
cars: TX Gemini 2L Twincam
TX Gemini SR20 18psi
Datsun 1200 Ute
Subaru Blitzen '06 EZ30 4th gen, 3.0R Spec B
Contact:

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by antus »

Yeah but there is a limit to how much you can recover from braking, hence the novel idea of recovering it from the turbo. great idea, I think. whether you like it or not, the sport is pushing technological development, the way it should be.
Have you read the FAQ? For lots of information and links to significant threads see here: http://pcmhacking.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1396
immortality
Posts: 3678
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:31 pm
cars: VH, VN, VS, VX

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by immortality »

It's governed by rules how much energy can be recovered/used from the kinetic energy recovery system.

The heat recovery is unlimited however you can only burn a certain amount of fuel so there is a limited amount of heat available as well.

Makes it an interesting proposition when all teams have the same amount of fuel and yet Mercedes are noticeably quicker. Turbo shaft speed is also limited to 125,000rpm
User avatar
Jayme
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:59 am
Location: North Coast, NSW

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by Jayme »

So much room for cheating...... all it takes is a few bodgey lines of code that governs the energy recovery or delivery and u are over the rules and have an advantage. How will abyone ever know? I know there are fuel flow meters on the fuel lines but are there energy flow meters on the wires?
User avatar
TdracerTd
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:39 pm
cars: Td Gemini coupe (race car WIP)
Holden VE SS ute (tow car/daily)
Vp commodore V6 (race car, s/c, e85, intercooled)
Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland (mrs car, family bus)
My12 subaru STi (Weekend warrior/Toy)
1972 LJ torana GTR (my Dad's car)
Mitsubishi Evo IX

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by TdracerTd »

:punk: I like that they are pushing technological limits with the new engines, but I would like to see the rules go- limit on fuel usage, limit on capacity and limit on revs. Also all the energy should come from the fuel, so no pre charging of batteries/ energy storage devices. The let them go at it and let them have unlimited engines and allow them to develop the engines as required. That will push the boundaries of technology and allow the other teams to catch up. Where they should be more restricted is in the aero area. I think technology there is pretty good and very well developed. The limiting factor as far as downforce is the rules, ie dimensions and envelopes of aerodynamic elements. I would like to see ground effect make a return, as this would allow the cars to run closer together and promote better racing. They should also impose rules relating to the turbulent air behind the cars. A lot of development has gone into spoiling the air behind so a competitor has a harder time making a pass.
User avatar
vlad01
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:41 pm
cars: VP I S
VP I executive
VP II executive
VP II executive #2
VR II executive
Location: Kyneton, Vic

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by vlad01 »

but having the rules there is what drives the innovating new technologies for difficult challenges such as efficiency.

F1 has been an efficiency race since the 80s. Basically, rules limit fuel, engine size, down force etc.. and is ever decreasing each session to make it harder, and the engineers have to come up with new ways of getting more efficiency from what they have to push the envelope of racing.

if it was free for all, engineers would become lazy and take the easy way out and just make everything bigger and more fuel hungry lol.
I'm the director of VSH (Vlad's Spec Holden), because HSV were doing it ass about.
User avatar
TdracerTd
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:39 pm
cars: Td Gemini coupe (race car WIP)
Holden VE SS ute (tow car/daily)
Vp commodore V6 (race car, s/c, e85, intercooled)
Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland (mrs car, family bus)
My12 subaru STi (Weekend warrior/Toy)
1972 LJ torana GTR (my Dad's car)
Mitsubishi Evo IX

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by TdracerTd »

Yep. I agree. I said there should be a limit on fuel, but how you extract the power/efficiency out of said amount of fuel should be free. It needs to be entertaining. The other problem is the way things are now, if you are a manufacturer and not Mercedes, I think you would be thinking very seriously about how long you want to be made to eat humble pie, as the rules don't allow them to improve their product.

It looks like Renault are on the way out as things stand, and so far the Honda effort appears to be a disaster, with no immediate solution. I hope I'm wrong and they do come up with a timely solution, but I think the odds are stacked against them.
immortality
Posts: 3678
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:31 pm
cars: VH, VN, VS, VX

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by immortality »

Jayme wrote:So much room for cheating...... all it takes is a few bodgey lines of code that governs the energy recovery or delivery and u are over the rules and have an advantage. How will abyone ever know? I know there are fuel flow meters on the fuel lines but are there energy flow meters on the wires?
Heat -energy recovery is unlimited so no issues there. Also, they are limited to how big there energy storage system is. System can be no larger than 25kg or lighter than 20kg so that in itself is a limiting factor unless someone has developed a much more radical battery.....

Energy recovery has been around for a few years now so everybody would be well aware off how these systems are monitored.

F1 is fairly stringent when it comes to rules and trying to bend em. A good and bad example is the Red Bull blown rear diffuser and how they were changing the engine mapping during qualifying to increase rear down force by keeping the engine revs up. No rule against a blown rear diffuser, however the rules were clear that you couldn't change the engine mapping from qualifying to race configuration. First they ruled against Red Bull but they lobbied and cried how it would adversely effect their performance and eventually F1 officials changed the rules. The other teams who raised the issue were not impressed.
immortality
Posts: 3678
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:31 pm
cars: VH, VN, VS, VX

Re: F1 Technologies

Post by immortality »

TdracerTd wrote:Yep. I agree. I said there should be a limit on fuel, but how you extract the power/efficiency out of said amount of fuel should be free. It needs to be entertaining. The other problem is the way things are now, if you are a manufacturer and not Mercedes, I think you would be thinking very seriously about how long you want to be made to eat humble pie, as the rules don't allow them to improve their product.

It looks like Renault are on the way out as things stand, and so far the Honda effort appears to be a disaster, with no immediate solution. I hope I'm wrong and they do come up with a timely solution, but I think the odds are stacked against them.
Yep, and it's worse this year as I believe each driver is limited to 5 power units before penalties are applied. Last year it was 8 and by the looks of things about half the field of cars have already used up 1 PU at the Aussie GP.

Unfortunately it's not uncommon in F1 for one team to find that certain something that makes them markedly quicker than the other teams, unfortunately with the cost saving initiatives it really prevents the other teams from further development to try and make up that performance gap.
Post Reply