KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems)

[Everso Biggyballies]

Probably time we had a thread dedicated to what will in time become a key discussion point to this 'Eco-friendly' solution making F1 more in line with what the greenies would wish.  As we know F1, from 2009  is introducing new rules that will lower the environmental impact of the sport. Part of this is to recover deceleration energy that can be stored for acceleration.Basically it is the FIA's plans to introduce environmentally-friendly technology in Formula One.  The potential of hybrid engines is immense, as is their part in F1 in making F1 less of a 'dogs balls' to those environmentalists that seem to be influencing our lives more and more as time goes on.

For the F1 applications, the stored kinetic energy can be applied by the driver on demand whenever required – at a rate and for a time period set by the regulations – to boost performance for rapid acceleration. The device is particularly beneficial when exiting corners or for tricky overtaking manoeuvres.  A sort of push to pass.

Its been a long time coming to F1, the supposed leaders in technology.  Now it is a fact of life for the very non green sport of F1, where we currently have road cars with more technology than F1 cars.  Indeed is what the  F1 rulemakers plan enough, in the right area or even going far enough.   The potential of hybrid engines is immense, but the solution chosen by the FIA restricts itself to recover energy from the rear wheels.

Toyota are one of the manufacturers that have been involved in this area not only through road cars such as the Prius, but in other race programmes such as their Toyota Supra HV-R that won the 24 Hours of Tokachi.

Hopefully those who are more technically minded such as OT, FIE, Courtney and others will be able to input their knowledge into this thread to help us all understand better the intricacies of it all.

[Everso Biggyballies]

Toyota engine chief Luca Marmorini believes that the FIA's plans  in Formula One do not go far enough.

He thinks the KERS devices in F1 will not be as advanced as those seen in other racing categories, and that means they will be of limited use for helping the road car industry.

"The adoption of energy recovery leaves me rather perplexed because the system chosen by the FIA is really primitive," Marmorini said in an interview with Italian magazine Autosprint.

"(They are) extremely simplified compared to the system we have on the Toyota Prius road car, or even on the Toyota Supra HV-R that won the 24 Hours of Tokachi.  Let's say that, if the Supra that races at Tokachi recovers 70% of the dissipated energy, the system chosen for F1 restricts itself to 20%. This system will end up being the same for everyone too, and in this case we'll refer to it as an accessory, devaluing a great technical issue along the way."

Others have been equally critical, with Mauro Forghieri, Ferrari's designer and engineer who worked with Niki Lauda to put Ferrari at the top of the tree in the 1970's, not only critical of the KERS technology rules to be introduced, but overall not happy with F1 in total, particularly in relation to engine developments and restrictions. I know what he means there.

His views on the issue:

"The environmental way of energy recovery and percentages of bio fuels is an interesting thing, but this aspect could be done more radically by defining a maximum amount of energy available, giving the engine designers full freedom to find the most suitable and imaginative technical solutions," he told Autosprint.

"It's sad to realize that today, in order to see an ample variety of engines in a race, you need to look at endurance racing, at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, while F1 has become like F3 engine-wise, only faster and infinitely more expensive."

Forghieri said he was no longer excited by F1 due to the introduction of an engine freeze.

"I don't even watch the Grands Prix anymore. Not only because of the lack of spectacle, but most of all for the lack of technical aspects," he explained.

"The engine aspect has simply disappeared, and for a technician like me, who has always tried to do new and original things, also making mistakes along the way at times, to see all the engines the same in architecture and performance it's really too much to swallow.

"In the name of safety and cost reduction someone has decided that engine research and development should be halted and frozen. Are we sure this was the right way to do it?"

He added: "If we had the current rules in the past, forcing equal engines, just think of how many technical solutions would never have been discovered.

"There wouldn't have been the turbo, the comprex (supercharger), pneumatic valves, direct injection and the common rail (diesel fuel injection system).

"Nowadays engines are an accessory, which the team can buy and install in the car and forget about all the rest. Engines are like the tyres or the spark plugs, just an accessory that must guarantee a certain efficiency and reliability as defined in the rules."

Its interesting that both these guys now see the engines as purely an accessory.  Tough words indeed coming from the likes of Forghieri, who was in his time all that the likes of Newey and Head plus more. He was a God in Marinello eyes, and is certainly near the top of the all time technical greats ever involved in F1. Not only did Mauro design (with Niki Lauda's input) the 312T series of Ferraris in the dominant years of the 1970's, but more significantly he designed the glorious sounding and legendary flat 12 engines that was so much a key to Ferraris success. In Ferrarispeak, he designed both the engine and the engine cover.A man whose comments are well worthy of taking into consideration in any technical matter.

Tougher words are perhaps those of Marmorini.... F1 engines are now extremely simplified compared to the system we have on the Toyota Prius  Thats a classic..... Onya Max!

[Jiji_the_cat]

all this tech freeze, and irrelevance comes down to the agenda of one man....Max Mosley...
i know we need to curb cost, but not at the hampering of tech...i am all for banning driver aids but not limiting other tech.
For F1 to survive we need the push in tech...Max is a hipocrit...he says F1 needs to become more relevant to road car manufacturers yet he limits the technology and freezes certain aspects.... just doesnt make sence..

[Oldtony]

A very interesting potential development that has probably been strangled at birth by ridiculously restrictive regulations,
KERS in F1 in 2009 can only store 400Kj of energy per lap, and that will give a driver approximately 80bhp over a 6.666sec burst to be released (without any traction control) at the command of the driver.
The system may only collect or return energy through the rear wheels and the vehicle must be fitted with approved sensors to ensure that these parameters are not exceeded.
As the man from Toyota said, that is way dumber than a Prius. Perhaps the only technical challenge is to provide the energy storage at minimum wieght rather than using battery technology. The most likely form of electrical storage is by capacitor which is suitable as the charge does not need to be stored over a long period. 
A firm caled Torotrak is also proposing a mechanical system using a flywheel driven by a form of CVT.
Toyota of course have raced a Supra in endurance events with an electronic system. 
BMW seem to be going down the Prius Generator/Motor betweent the Engine and transmission and have stated they are willing to supply the complete engine/KERS/transmission unit to another team in 2009.
The interesting thing is that no one has even mentioned the hydraulic storage and regen method.
By the way when you read the Regs it is amazing the amount of technology used in road cars that is banned in F1. For a little light reading try
http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1151088479__2009_F1_TECHNICAL_REGULATIONS.pdf

For instance did you know that variable valve timing and lift are banned in F1 engines as well as any form of ignition other than the old fashioned capacitor discharge system (points/condenser/coil). When were they last used for a road car?
There is also a very interesting "kill initiative"clause that says any new technology not specificaly covered by the regulations must be approved and deemed permissable by the FIA technical Committee, and that approval would only last until the end of the season.  The Technology would then be refered to the F1 Commission for adoption.  Even if not approved full details of the technology would be required to be published
 and circulated.
Not exactly encouraging the best minds in the business to think outside a very small square

[f1engineer]

EB, you didn't by chance keep any of the thread that we did on hydraulic regen braking mate?

[Everso Biggyballies]

EB, you didn't by chance keep any of the thread that we did on hydraulic regen braking mate?

Was that V1 or RPM?  I remember doing something on the McLaren system but not sure if I kept a copy. 

[f1engineer]

EB, you didn't by chance keep any of the thread that we did on hydraulic regen braking mate?

Was that V1 or RPM?  I remember doing something on the McLaren system but not sure if I kept a copy. 

It was on rpm just as we were closing down.

[Everso Biggyballies]

Max Muesli took advantage of the opportunity to tell those that are influential in the Green world the F1 plans to reduce its non green reputation, during a speech to the International Advanced Mobility Forum (IAMF) at the Geneva Motor Show on Tuesday. The IAMF is a scientific and public forum, which focuses on personal mobility for a sustainable future.

The way he has presented it is in my opinion quite clever (to a green 'layman' such as myself) in as much as even some of his more recent strange technical restrictions in terms of increasing power almost make sense as  part of an overal direction.  In effect what he is saying is that gaining power in conventional F1 terms is easy, so therefore ban the easy method, and force these skilled and world leading F1 technical guys to seek the improvements in other more environmentally friendly areas such as KERS, thus creating it as a priority in the F1 world.  It sort of makes sense.  All we need now is to ensure that we see it regulated in the most eco friendly way that maintains F1's reputatin for technical excellence. Here is the basis of his presentation to the IAMF:
(International AMF )

“In 2009 Formula One is going hybrid as the first stage of a programme to divert the vast research effort at the pinnacle of motor sport towards energy efficiency,” said Mosley. “The development of engines has been frozen, meaning that extra power can only be gained by making better use of energy, or by getting more useful work from the fuel burned.

“Called KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System), this hybrid device is set to revolutionise Formula One. It will make the sport at once more environmentally friendly, road relevant, and at the cutting edge of future automotive technology.

“By bringing in rule changes which make these technologies the only means by which a power advantage can be obtained, we can ensure that the outstanding engineers and huge budgets available to Formula One will be deployed on energy recovery technologies which are directly relevant to the car industry’s efforts to reduce CO2 emissions as well as the average motorist’s fuel bill.”

The FIA President also took the opportunity of the IAMF event to present the Make Cars Green campaign, which forms part of the FIA’s ongoing commitment to work with policy makers, industry and motoring consumers to encourage greener motoring.

[Oldtony]

EB, I really can't work out where Max gets the arrogance (stupidity, ignorance?)  to present that to a gathered group of experts.
At one point in the presemtation he said "Because of the engine freeze the only way to get more power (in F1) is to regenerate more power from waste energy".  A totally untrue and dumb statement because the F1 regs limit the amount of power that can be regenerated, stored, and reused. It even limits the way in which it can be delivered.  He went on to talk about the fine research minds in F1, but he has told those minds Don't bother we are not going to let you do anything usefull, we have set limmits to ensure that F1 cars are about 5 years behind road cars.
He might get away with that to the Tabloid Press, but to engineers, scientists and researchers?
The mind boggles.
Just who is nobbling F1 research. Is it the Fuel companies?  Is it the Manufacturers themselves?  Is it Bernie frightened his TV show might be affected?  Or is it just plain stupidity?
Here endeth the Rant.

[f1engineer]

We have disscussed this OT, I think we came to the conclusion that they could get Moog to supply all the bits to "engineer" an explosive, on tap hydraulic regen system that would suit F1 needs. I feel that the Petro companies might be in colusion with Max, or have even threatened him.
It would seem that F1 is taking the "control" series that was CCWS. Being that we now have a control ESC, technically over-regulated hinderances on anything that gets developed (mass damper- don't get me started there) and a single tyre manufacturer. Cost cutting is a smoke screen for a hidden agenda, the only place that they can get an edge now is on aero. even that is now over regulated.
There will be a corner to turn soon, and i hope it is sooner than later.

[Everso Biggyballies]

There will be a corner to turn soon, and i hope it is sooner than later.

As long as we are not in the turn already, having missed the apex (because of no engine braking!) and heading towards the Barriers / Escape road / Tilke sized run-off area.  The problem is that in theory and perhaps to the uninformed he is doing the right thing, but to those in the know or seemingly most of the manufacturers it seems the restrictions in method for KERS is not the way to be heading to maximise the benefits.

Surely Max isnt so thicl skinned as too believe that when a manufacturer tells him that the regulations proposed are going to result in technology about on part with an x years old Toyota Prius is not actually a compliment!

[f1engineer]

I can't understand why they don't open the door on this and let them all go hard. Maybe Toyota have come up with a system from existing technology and are looking to sell it as a control system, which defeats the purpose of having it as a race item, so that's probalby not the case.
I hope they let the teams all have a good shot at developing a hybrid system, be it Electrical, hydraulic or Kinetic. I don't know, maybe they all fear another case of Ferrari like domination.

[Everso Biggyballies]

I can't understand why they don't open the door on this and let them all go hard. Maybe Toyota have come up with a system from existing technology and are looking to sell it as a control system, which defeats the purpose of having it as a race item, so that's probalby not the case.
I hope they let the teams all have a good shot at developing a hybrid system, be it Electrical, hydraulic or Kinetic. I don't know, maybe they all fear another case of Ferrari like domination.

Well certainly Toyota are out there with the technology and running it already in a carr with a view to going back to Le Mans with it in the next couple of years.

From the second post down:

"(They are) extremely simplified compared to the system we have on the Toyota Prius road car, or even on the Toyota Supra HV-R that won the 24 Hours of Tokachi. Let's say that, if the Supra that races at Tokachi recovers 70% of the dissipated energy, the system chosen for F1 restricts itself to 20%. This system will end up being the same for everyone too, and in this case we'll refer to it as an accessory, devaluing a great technical issue along the way."

This is a pic of the HV-R that won the 24hrs at a canter from all accounts:
 


"The Denso SARD Supra HV-R maintained a steady lead of several laps throughout the course of the race, and in the later hours, it essentially dialed things up a notch and ran away from the rest of the field. "

[Everso Biggyballies]

A bit more info on the Toyota system used in the SUpra HRV.

The Toyota Supra HV-R hybrid race car which made history by being the first hybrid race car ever to win a competition (the Tokachi 24-Hour Race, 14/15 July), has gained further honours winning the award for Race Engine of The Year 2007.

The nominations were selected by the editors of Race Engine Technology magazine and the awards were determined through votes cast by practising race engine professionals across all forms of global motor sport. The four categories include: Grand Prix; Global Motorsport; North American Race Engine and Alternative Power Race Engine, with one winner for the overall title of Race Engine of the Year.

By entering hybrid systems into racing events, Toyota engineers anticipate discovering ways to make hybrid systems (more famously fitted to the Toyota Prius production car), more efficient and lighter.  This year’s race car was based on the iconic Supra GT used in Super GT races in Japan, modified and equipped with a special racing hybrid system. In order to improve the system’s regeneration and operating efficiency during the race, the following two distinctive technologies have been incorporated into it:

Three Electric Motors
A four-wheel energy regeneration and drive system has been adopted which includes in-wheel motors in the front wheels in addition to one 150 kW rear-axle mounted electric motor. Thanks to this energy regeneration system with three motor/generators, the vehicle can more efficiently recover a greater amount of energy during rapid decleration and braking from high speeds. 

Specially Designed Capacitor
In light of the fact that racing involves a repeated acceleration and deceleration under full system performance, a quick-charging capacitor system was adopted instead of the usual rechargeable batteries.

Sponsored by the PMI Group and its member companies JE Pistons, Carillo and Wiseco, the awards were presented on Thursday 8 November at the Professional Motorsport World Expo in Cologne Germany.   

Specifications of Toyota Supra HV-R


Entry Class
GT/TP1

Engine
Modified (Super GT version 3UZ-FE engine)

Engine displacement
4,480cc

Air restrictor
29.6mm i2

Maximum output
480ps min/6,800rpm

Maximum torque
510 Nm at 5,600rpm

Electric motors
Front motor: 10kW i2 (in-wheel motor)
Rear motor: 150kW

Vehicle weight
1.080 kg

Team name
TOYOTA Team SARD

Drivers
Katsuyuki Hiranaka (Japan)
Andre Couto (Portugal)
Akira Lida (Japan)
Tatsuya Kataoka (Japan)

[DVST8R]

all this tech freeze, and irrelevance comes down to the agenda of one man....Max Mosley...
i know we need to curb cost, but not at the hampering of tech...i am all for banning driver aids but not limiting other tech.
For F1 to survive we need the push in tech...Max is a hipocrit...he says F1 needs to become more relevant to road car manufacturers yet he limits the technology and freezes certain aspects.... just doesnt make sence..

Its typical Max Mosley doing stuff he has no clue about. Makes perfect sense.

[Oldtony]

Very interesting, if slightly old article on KERS and F1.

http://www.evworld.co/syndicated/evworld_article_1160.cfm

The interesting thing is that (unless they've changed in the last week or so) the regs are still those quoted. Niether Purnell or Ricardos or the manufacturers have been able to convince Max and the FIA how daft they are.

[Oldtony]

Ferrari have announced that they have merged the engine and electronics divisions in the F1 team to develop the KERS power pack for next year. They are co-operating with Magnetti Marelli on development so this would indicate they are going the electric regen route, and most probably with the Generator/Motor sandwiched between engie and transmission.
Seems as if that will be the standard package.
Force India have announced they will be using the Ferrari "Power Pack" but will be developing thier own seamless shift transmission.

[Oldtony]

The Flybrid KERS system is still being touted in some circles with a UK firm claiming to have a workable solotion to its potential problems by running the flywheel in a vacuum.
http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/f1/182017/f1-kers-flybrid.html

Max has also written to the teams with some pretty challenging suggestions on the development of KERS technology through to 2013. As quoted in Autosport;
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/66676

Maybe advanced enough to keep Toyota interested???????

[Matt]

Increasing the input over three years? Why not now? The thermal recovery stuff sounds interesting though.

[Mothers Worry]

Ferrari critical of KERS plans 

From autosport.com:

Ferrari critical of KERS plans 

Wednesday, April 23rd 2008, 10:31 GMT

Ferrari's vice president Piero Ferrari believes the Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems will only increase costs and will not improve the racing.

KERS are due to be introduced in Formula One from 2009 in what promises to be a major challenge for engineers.

The system will allow drivers to draw 60kW of energy from one axle on the car to be used in the form of a "push-to-pass" button to increase the chances of overtaking.

Ferrari, however, believes the system will not mean more overtaking and will also see the teams having to spend more money in research.

"We should reflect on many of the technical and sporting decisions taken in F1 lately," he told Italian magazine Autosprint.

"Engines were frozen with the result that all of them now run at 19,000 revolutions, so there's no difference in power nor revs, and therefore there's no way you can take advantage of a possible overrevving to try to overtake.

"We should have done something similar to what NASCAR has done: to set some limits in the regulations, while allowing for researching and re-designing. The way the regulations are right now, we can't re-design a single part to improve it. It's excessive. Ferrari have great engine guys twiddling their thumbs.

"By contrast, they make us spend time and money to design the KERS, for which we can't evaluate the costs precisely because it's a new technology.

"It's also based on knowledge unknown to traditional engine guys, like high-capacity batteries and high-performance electrical engines, for which you need specialized engineers from outside the motoring world.

"To acquire that know-how will cause high levels of spending over the years, it's not the best solution to reduce costs.

"Engine recovery is fine, but not this way. Too many different systems to recover energy have been permitted. They need to be limited, otherwise costs could go sky-high, with the risk of having to cut drastically on other areas to limit spending, as was done with engines, revs, and electronics.

"This way we risk to transform an F1 car into a GP2 car, and that must not happen."