BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
By BMW Sauber F1 Team July 14 2008
Hybrid technology in Formula One has been given the go-ahead and the development process is underway. Powered by a modified drive concept, the top category of motorsport is poised to enter a new dimension in 2009 – and deliver significant impetus for the development of standard production vehicles in the process.
Hybrid technology in Formula One has been given the go-ahead and the development process is underway. Powered by a modified drive concept, the top category of motorsport is poised to enter a new dimension in 2009 – and deliver significant impetus for the development of standard production vehicles in the process.
From the start of next season, the Formula One regulations allow for the use of hybrid technology to increase the output and efficiency of the cars. To this end, the BMW Sauber F1 Team is working flat out on the development of its KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System) brake energy regeneration system.
BMW Sauber F1 Team enhances the hybrid expertise of the BMW Group.
As Dr Klaus Draeger, member of the BMW AG Board of Management responsible for development, reports: “The BMW Group can transfer the knowledge gained within the BMW Sauber F1 Team directly into the development of standard production vehicles. This makes Formula One the ideal pre-development platform for innovative drive technologies. The new Formula One regulations give us the opportunity to use innovative hybrid technology under extreme conditions and in so doing to garner crucial expertise for series development as well. BMW customers stand to benefit as a result. The KERS unit designed for the BMW Sauber F1.09 is a highly effective variant of brake energy regeneration technology, and is similar in the way it works to the ActiveHybrid technology developed for BMW standard production vehicles.”
BMW Sauber F1 Team develops electric KERS system. KERS enables the regeneration and storage of braking energy, which is then put on tap as an extra source of power under acceleration to complement the output of the V8 engine. The BMW Sauber F1 Team has decided to focus its efforts on an electric solution. The BMW Sauber F1.09 will be equipped with a hybrid system consisting of a combination of electric motor and generator, the requisite power electronics and an energy storage module.
The BMW Sauber F1.09 will store enough energy under braking to provide an additional 60 kW of output over around 6.5 seconds of acceleration. The complete system will weigh under 40 kg. This means that the power density of the F1 KERS technology will be considerably greater than that of the systems currently used in standard production vehicles. The newly acquired expertise will flow straight into production car development over the years to come.
“For us KERS is an extremely exciting project and a great opportunity. We are standing at the threshold between a conventional package of engine and independent transmission and an integrated drive system,” explains BMW Motorsport Director Mario Theissen: “The power density of the KERS components will far exceed that of today’s hybrid vehicles. KERS will see Formula One take on a pioneering role for series production technologies going forward. F1 will give a baptism of fire to innovative concepts whose service life and reliability have not yet reached the level required for series production vehicles, and their development will be driven forward at full speed.
At BMW we have always used the Formula One project as a technology laboratory for series production. With KERS this approach takes on a whole new dimension. Formula One will re-position itself and undergo a change of image, allowing the sport to take significant strides forward in terms of public acceptance.”
The BMW Group already includes a brake energy regeneration system in a large number of its series-produced models as part of its BMW EfficientDynamics package. It is also preparing to introduce BMW ActiveHybrid technology in various model series.
Bookmark or share this story with:
Digg
Delicious
Facebook
Reddit
StumbleuponRelated Articles:
| 14 Jul, 2008 12:39 | Report |
|
jeetv27 (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Jul, 2008 Location: Posts: 82 |
| 14 Jul, 2008 18:46 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
| 14 Jul, 2008 18:58 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
THe 60KW and 6,6666secs per lap are standard fixed by FIA.
And the 40kg is an aproximate figure, similar in all teams (amybe lighter in the mech Kers than in the electric ones)
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
And the 40kg is an aproximate figure, similar in all teams (amybe lighter in the mech Kers than in the electric ones)
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 14 Jul, 2008 19:20 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Wow, I find that shocking about the restrictions. With the additional weight of the system, will it in generate enough advantage ? I thought Kubica was a bit worried about it.
Then again, KERS is not compulsory, right ?
What about running one car with KERS and the other one without in the next season ? Dreaming I know, but this restriction is idiotic.
Then again, KERS is not compulsory, right ?
What about running one car with KERS and the other one without in the next season ? Dreaming I know, but this restriction is idiotic.
Reply•Quote
| 14 Jul, 2008 19:29 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Well, in fact many teams have been specualting that could use the KERS only in some races.
I hope that, for the spectacle shake (overtakings) they use it every race. But we will see.
IMO reason why its not yet mandatory is because small teams could not get it ready for 2008. I have heard that for 2010 it should be mandatory.
And I don't think they would use it just in one car. It would always benefit one of them, and nowadays nº1 drivers are not politically correct
Plus it would always handicap the team, at least in the WCC. Its better to calculate well if the benefits are enough or not.
I expect BMW to use it in all races.
Thing is, if you have to do 2 designs of the car, one with KERS and another without, that causes problems and can make you lose time in development (bear in mind that the KERS will be placed in a key place. Transmission, ance hence KERS, is not like external aero appendages that can be easily removed or changed from race to race or even in the GP. It needs quite big modifications, including the whole transmission lay-out).
I would rather spend all the time designing a KERS car and improving it, instead of two dif cars.
PS: I have heard too that FIA may force teams to use it at least in a minimum number of races.
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
I hope that, for the spectacle shake (overtakings) they use it every race. But we will see.
IMO reason why its not yet mandatory is because small teams could not get it ready for 2008. I have heard that for 2010 it should be mandatory.
And I don't think they would use it just in one car. It would always benefit one of them, and nowadays nº1 drivers are not politically correct
Plus it would always handicap the team, at least in the WCC. Its better to calculate well if the benefits are enough or not.
I expect BMW to use it in all races.
Thing is, if you have to do 2 designs of the car, one with KERS and another without, that causes problems and can make you lose time in development (bear in mind that the KERS will be placed in a key place. Transmission, ance hence KERS, is not like external aero appendages that can be easily removed or changed from race to race or even in the GP. It needs quite big modifications, including the whole transmission lay-out).
I would rather spend all the time designing a KERS car and improving it, instead of two dif cars.
PS: I have heard too that FIA may force teams to use it at least in a minimum number of races.
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 14 Jul, 2008 20:05 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
¨I would rather spend all the time designing a KERS car and improving it, instead of two dif cars.¨
With the output and restriction for the foreseeable future, that would mean only weight reduction, right ?
What about ballast ( about 70kgs ) in relation to KERS weight penalty ? Can they play around that ?
With the output and restriction for the foreseeable future, that would mean only weight reduction, right ?
What about ballast ( about 70kgs ) in relation to KERS weight penalty ? Can they play around that ?
Reply•Quote
| 14 Jul, 2008 21:09 | Report |
|
gturner (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 1221 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Here's the problem with not running KERS on one car. Besides the fact that there would be a significant number of components that would have to be specific to the KERS car or the non-KERS car, it would also be harder to take data from one car and apply the lessons to the other. After all, if not running the KERS system has a significant effect on the handling of the car, then the KERS car would need a very different set up. On the other hand, if the ballast is being used to make the cars behave similarly (or if KERS doesn't have a signifaicant effect), then there really is no point to not running KERS on both cars. As it is, the only real disadvantage with KERS is having less ballast to use for manipulating the center of gravity.
As for the restrictions, I'm guessing the FIA is concerned about the overall increase in power the cars will be putting out (after all, they've gone to considerable lengths to reduce engine power), and I'm sure the car manufacturers put some input into this. Maybe striving for smaller, lighter units is more in line with their goals than just making more powerful units.
I do have a question though. How does mechanical KERS work? I just sort of assumed that all of the systems would be of the electrical variety.
"Speed has never killed anyone, suddenly becoming stationary... That's what gets you."-Jeremy Clarkson
As for the restrictions, I'm guessing the FIA is concerned about the overall increase in power the cars will be putting out (after all, they've gone to considerable lengths to reduce engine power), and I'm sure the car manufacturers put some input into this. Maybe striving for smaller, lighter units is more in line with their goals than just making more powerful units.
I do have a question though. How does mechanical KERS work? I just sort of assumed that all of the systems would be of the electrical variety.
"Speed has never killed anyone, suddenly becoming stationary... That's what gets you."-Jeremy Clarkson
Reply•Quote
| 15 Jul, 2008 04:51 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Quote:gturner
On the other hand, if the ballast is being used to make the cars behave similarly (or if KERS doesn't have a signifaicant effect), then there really is no point to not running KERS on both cars. As it is, the only real disadvantage with KERS is having less ballast to use for manipulating the center of gravity.
As for the restrictions, I'm guessing the FIA is concerned about the overall increase in power the cars will be putting out (after all, they've gone to considerable lengths to reduce engine power), and I'm sure the car manufacturers put some input into this. Maybe striving for smaller, lighter units is more in line with their goals than just making more powerful units.
Ha, I see. That's enlightening.
Reply•Quote
| 15 Jul, 2008 11:13 | Report |
|
pgj (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 7236 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Quote:gturner
... I do have a question though. How does mechanical KERS work? I just sort of assumed that all of the systems would be of the electrical variety.
I have no idea. I have heard it said that there is a mechanical and electronic fly-wheel version along with and all electronic version. I have a rough idea of the technology that is involved, but no clue how the technology translates into power on the track.
I have seen snippets of an interview with Adrian Newey in which he says that teams who are developing an electronic system will disadvantaged in having to ship their batteries out for the first race in January. Ideally, he feels that KERS should not be used in the first race but accepts that ot probably will be. Has anyone seen the full interview? I would like to read it.
Williams and proud of it.
Reply•Quote
| 15 Jul, 2008 12:52 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Effectively, mechanical devices would be flywheels.
I think WIlliams will use Torotrack's flywheel. Just google a bit and you will find plenty of info about mechanical flywheels. Or even in this forum there was a couple of threads about it
Regarding KERS in general, at first (when the KErs idea first appearead in F1 some time ago) it was suggested that it should be a no-more than 20kg device, but with no limit in power.
This however had some problems:
First, it would favour mech devices which at the moment are lighter than electric devices, which need a motor-generator plus the batteries, while the mech only needs a small flywheel (which together with its casing weights just 5kgs) and a CVT. But the problem is that mech devices are less road relevant than electric ones.
Second, each team would have a different power of KERS, making kind of unfair the overtaking periods (and hence less overtaking probably) and different lap times.
Third, in road cars you normally want a device that produces X hp and is as light as possible, not the other way around. SO the same should happen in F1.
PS1: there can be also other kind of mech KERS, that are hydraulic KERS, but have been desestimated, probably due to complexity, problems with reliability, difficulty to apply it to road cars, etc.
PS2: 60KW are 80KW, so thats around 10% extra of power for F1 during those 6,666 secs
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
I think WIlliams will use Torotrack's flywheel. Just google a bit and you will find plenty of info about mechanical flywheels. Or even in this forum there was a couple of threads about it
Regarding KERS in general, at first (when the KErs idea first appearead in F1 some time ago) it was suggested that it should be a no-more than 20kg device, but with no limit in power.
This however had some problems:
First, it would favour mech devices which at the moment are lighter than electric devices, which need a motor-generator plus the batteries, while the mech only needs a small flywheel (which together with its casing weights just 5kgs) and a CVT. But the problem is that mech devices are less road relevant than electric ones.
Second, each team would have a different power of KERS, making kind of unfair the overtaking periods (and hence less overtaking probably) and different lap times.
Third, in road cars you normally want a device that produces X hp and is as light as possible, not the other way around. SO the same should happen in F1.
PS1: there can be also other kind of mech KERS, that are hydraulic KERS, but have been desestimated, probably due to complexity, problems with reliability, difficulty to apply it to road cars, etc.
PS2: 60KW are 80KW, so thats around 10% extra of power for F1 during those 6,666 secs
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 15 Jul, 2008 12:57 | Report |
|
pgj (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 7236 |
| 15 Jul, 2008 15:52 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
What about braking stability ?
Will the KERS weight and center of gravity penalty negate whatever advantages of KERS in the acceleration department since it will be slower to stop the car ?
Just like the Seat TDI ( WTCC ) having the extra weight ( heavier engine ), and I could see them really struggling to stop the car in the corners at the recent Estoril race.
Last but not least, what about the effects of extra weight to tyre degradation in the race, - and also qualifying ?
Will the KERS weight and center of gravity penalty negate whatever advantages of KERS in the acceleration department since it will be slower to stop the car ?
Just like the Seat TDI ( WTCC ) having the extra weight ( heavier engine ), and I could see them really struggling to stop the car in the corners at the recent Estoril race.
Last but not least, what about the effects of extra weight to tyre degradation in the race, - and also qualifying ?
Reply•Quote
| 15 Jul, 2008 16:27 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
I have found an informative write-up about KERS when doing some googling on the internet.
Thanks to Greywolf74 of SPEEDTv forum.
If you look at the diagram,
[www.motorauthority.com]
there is a large grey cylinder and a gear train
mounted above the transmission gears and ahead
of the differential. Unless I miss my guess, this
is a "flywheel" -- a rotating cylinder of some
heavy material like steel or perhaps even denser.
Under braking, the gear train and clutches
(the brown parts, just in front of the differential)
engage, revving the flywheel cylinder up to as much
as 10,000 rpm. Once at speed, it will continue to
spin on its bearings like a gyroscope, conserving
the rotational energy picked up from the wheels.
When the driver pushes the "use the energy" button,
the clutches engage and the energy flow is reversed.
Now, the flywheel turns the axel, adding torque to
the already rotating wheels. An continuously variable
transmission between the clutches matches the
flywheel's rpm to the road wheels' speed, allowing
smooth use of the energy recovered under braking.
One thing to keep in mind is that because this
kinetic energy recovery system uses mass, rather
than electricity to store energy, and the maximum
flywheel RPM is limited, there is a maximum amount
of energy the system can hold, and thus, a maximum
the driver can recover. He can't save power by
not using the system for several laps. Also, it
will take awhile to recharge the energy by bringing
the flywheel back up to speed.
As with all things, the driver will have to be
judicious in how he uses the "energy recovery"
button.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
You don´t want to know what´s going to happen when the flywheel goes bang - the word grenade comes to mind !!
Thanks to Greywolf74 of SPEEDTv forum.
If you look at the diagram,
[www.motorauthority.com]
there is a large grey cylinder and a gear train
mounted above the transmission gears and ahead
of the differential. Unless I miss my guess, this
is a "flywheel" -- a rotating cylinder of some
heavy material like steel or perhaps even denser.
Under braking, the gear train and clutches
(the brown parts, just in front of the differential)
engage, revving the flywheel cylinder up to as much
as 10,000 rpm. Once at speed, it will continue to
spin on its bearings like a gyroscope, conserving
the rotational energy picked up from the wheels.
When the driver pushes the "use the energy" button,
the clutches engage and the energy flow is reversed.
Now, the flywheel turns the axel, adding torque to
the already rotating wheels. An continuously variable
transmission between the clutches matches the
flywheel's rpm to the road wheels' speed, allowing
smooth use of the energy recovered under braking.
One thing to keep in mind is that because this
kinetic energy recovery system uses mass, rather
than electricity to store energy, and the maximum
flywheel RPM is limited, there is a maximum amount
of energy the system can hold, and thus, a maximum
the driver can recover. He can't save power by
not using the system for several laps. Also, it
will take awhile to recharge the energy by bringing
the flywheel back up to speed.
As with all things, the driver will have to be
judicious in how he uses the "energy recovery"
button.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
You don´t want to know what´s going to happen when the flywheel goes bang - the word grenade comes to mind !!
Reply•Quote
| 15 Jul, 2008 17:28 | Report |
|
sessions (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 3473 |
| 15 Jul, 2008 21:31 | Report |
|
gturner (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 1221 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Quote:Last but not least, what about the effects of extra weight to tyre degradation in the race, - and also qualifying ?
Next year's cars won't be any heavier than this year's. F1 cars are built so far below the weight limit that they can easily dump 40kg of ballast to offset the weight of KERS.
As for a flywheel failing, it's no more of an issue than all of the other spinning mass (engine, transmission) failing.
"Speed has never killed anyone, suddenly becoming stationary... That's what gets you."-Jeremy Clarkson
Reply•Quote
| 16 Jul, 2008 04:41 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
| 16 Jul, 2008 10:10 | Report |
|
BMWF1Talk Moderator |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Poland Posts: 1585 |
| 16 Jul, 2008 14:11 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
German Rocket, Robert's worries was, that if already this year the team struggled with balance and needed some extra ballast to correct the balance, imagine how it should be next year, with almost 40kg less of ballast at disposal of engineers.
But probably next year all cars will still stay at the 605kg limit.
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
But probably next year all cars will still stay at the 605kg limit.
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 16 Jul, 2008 15:10 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
That really lit up the somewhat confusing ( for me ) KERS issue. After all these, I think I have a slightly ( just ) better understanding of KERS and the whole weight issue.
So JRaid, does this means that the battery cannot offset the purpose of the 40kg ballast even though it can, weight-wise, am I correct ?
So JRaid, does this means that the battery cannot offset the purpose of the 40kg ballast even though it can, weight-wise, am I correct ?
Reply•Quote
| 16 Jul, 2008 15:52 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Werll, first of all:
F1 cars, without minimun limit, would weight somewhere between 500 and 530kgs. SO thats why ballast is used.
If instead of those, lets say, 520ks, you have to add a Kers, that lets say it wegihts 30kg, then if you still don't want to be above the min limit, then you have 30kg less of ballast (normally tugsten, placed in lower places, to improve the placing of the Center of Gravity).
Off course you could place those batteries in spencial places to act like the ballast, but there are 2 main problems:
1st: Probably they aren't as dense as tugsten, hence for the same weight, they occupy more volume , which is not good if you want a tight car, as in F1.
2nd: probably you cannot place that batteries as low as the ballast, or in extreme positions. Mainly because those batteries need quite a lot room and have a defined shape, while ballast can have a shape that can adapt better to different parts of the car. Plus you cannot place the batteries in the nose cone or front wing, while you could do so with ballast (look at renault's front end for example). And similar for other places such as where the diffuser starts (down the driver), etc.
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
F1 cars, without minimun limit, would weight somewhere between 500 and 530kgs. SO thats why ballast is used.
If instead of those, lets say, 520ks, you have to add a Kers, that lets say it wegihts 30kg, then if you still don't want to be above the min limit, then you have 30kg less of ballast (normally tugsten, placed in lower places, to improve the placing of the Center of Gravity).
Off course you could place those batteries in spencial places to act like the ballast, but there are 2 main problems:
1st: Probably they aren't as dense as tugsten, hence for the same weight, they occupy more volume , which is not good if you want a tight car, as in F1.
2nd: probably you cannot place that batteries as low as the ballast, or in extreme positions. Mainly because those batteries need quite a lot room and have a defined shape, while ballast can have a shape that can adapt better to different parts of the car. Plus you cannot place the batteries in the nose cone or front wing, while you could do so with ballast (look at renault's front end for example). And similar for other places such as where the diffuser starts (down the driver), etc.
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 16 Jul, 2008 16:21 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
| 16 Jul, 2008 16:47 | Report |
|
BMWF1Talk Moderator |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Poland Posts: 1585 |
| 16 Jul, 2008 16:50 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Some more information about KERS I've just collected. Thought I'd like to share with you guys.
Talk about cost cutting measures. I've found from other sites that those battery cost USD$400,000 per installation and they're lithium, have limited duty cycles ( only two-hour peak performance race and no more ). In other words, they need to be "thrown away" after each race.
"Thrown away" as in disposal by burning - at which point the batteries allegedly produce pure, unadulterated arsenic.
Teams will obviously aim to position the various constituent parts of KERS, which most agree will carry a penalty of 25 - 30 kg ( maybe Toyota battery - lightest of all ), as low and as close to the centre of the car as possible in order to minimise balance disruptions, and the obvious place to position batteries is under the fuel tank.
Safety is another issue. No safety procedures had been framed by the FIA.
The obvious hazard would be the 10 kilogram carbon fibre flywheels spinning at up to 60 000 rpm. While they were tested in crash test under controlled condition and managed to be contained, race conditions however can be completely otherwise.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From an article:
"KERS is driven through the rear axle under braking," he explained, "and once you've saturated the storage device to the permitted level then obviously the torque through the rear axle can change. That is potentially a tricky thing for the teams to manage, so the gain is maybe two or three tenths of a second, and the loss is the ballast or weight, and the packaging and the issue of torque management of the rear axle. It's far from slam-dunk, as they say..."
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
By the way, BMW are totally commited to KERS, perhaps for a good reason. You see, it seems that Prof. Burkhard Goeschel ( a former BMW Director For Development ) has played a major role with Max Mosley in conceiving the concept. So guys, this could play into our hands. He he ..
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:07:16:16:53:27 by German Rocket.
Talk about cost cutting measures. I've found from other sites that those battery cost USD$400,000 per installation and they're lithium, have limited duty cycles ( only two-hour peak performance race and no more ). In other words, they need to be "thrown away" after each race.
"Thrown away" as in disposal by burning - at which point the batteries allegedly produce pure, unadulterated arsenic.
Teams will obviously aim to position the various constituent parts of KERS, which most agree will carry a penalty of 25 - 30 kg ( maybe Toyota battery - lightest of all ), as low and as close to the centre of the car as possible in order to minimise balance disruptions, and the obvious place to position batteries is under the fuel tank.
Safety is another issue. No safety procedures had been framed by the FIA.
The obvious hazard would be the 10 kilogram carbon fibre flywheels spinning at up to 60 000 rpm. While they were tested in crash test under controlled condition and managed to be contained, race conditions however can be completely otherwise.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From an article:
"KERS is driven through the rear axle under braking," he explained, "and once you've saturated the storage device to the permitted level then obviously the torque through the rear axle can change. That is potentially a tricky thing for the teams to manage, so the gain is maybe two or three tenths of a second, and the loss is the ballast or weight, and the packaging and the issue of torque management of the rear axle. It's far from slam-dunk, as they say..."
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
By the way, BMW are totally commited to KERS, perhaps for a good reason. You see, it seems that Prof. Burkhard Goeschel ( a former BMW Director For Development ) has played a major role with Max Mosley in conceiving the concept. So guys, this could play into our hands. He he ..
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:07:16:16:53:27 by German Rocket.
Reply•Quote
| 17 Jul, 2008 11:19 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Barteks, that weight (520) was including the driver, which makes F1 even more impressiev (I've been always amazed how light and resistant carbon fiber and kevlar and all that stuff can be). Otherwise the team could not put any ballast on his car
Germn Rocket, interesting stuff. The batteries life is ceratinly an issue. FIA should force it to be like engines, that means lasting for at least a couple of races. IMo it should last 4 GP's. And should force them to recycle.
That would make them more road relevant, although it would benefit teams with mech KERS, as mech KERS don't lose as much efficiency as electric batteries.
Anyway, Some extra info. Rules state:
With the exception of one fully charged KERS, the total amount of recoverable energy stored on the car must not exceed 300kJ. Any which may be recovered at a rate greater than 2kW must not exceed 20kJ.
The maximum power, in or out, of any KERS must not exceed 60kW (81bhp). Energy released from the KERS may not exceed 400kJ in any one lap. Measurements will be taken at the connection to the rear wheel drive train.
Any KERS may only be capable of increasing the stored energy whilst the car is moving on the track. Release of power from any such system must remain under the complete control of the driver at all times the car is on the track.
Cars must be fitted with homologated sensors which provide all necessary signals to the SDR in order to verify the requirements above are being respected.
Any components required as part of a KERS will be controled by the SECU
(remember that KW= KJ/s , that meansPower=Energy/s )
Hopefully in 2010 or 2011 there will be the possibility to use another KERS for the front axle, which will improve the boost power and at the same time reduce fuel comsuption. A win-win situation.
ABout BMW, yeah they are fully commited. You just need to take a look at their road cars lately. They are pioneering the car efficiency. With their "EfficientDynamics" they are making their car the less fuel-comsumers of their range (that means at equal power, the need less fuel than any rival). ANd they apply it to all their series.
They use stuff like active aerodynamics, brake energy regeneration (in reality its a automatically disengageable battery and pumps), autos start and stop, etc.
You can find more info about it at http://www.bmw.com/com/en/insights/technology/efficient_dynamics/phase_2/technologies/overview.html
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Germn Rocket, interesting stuff. The batteries life is ceratinly an issue. FIA should force it to be like engines, that means lasting for at least a couple of races. IMo it should last 4 GP's. And should force them to recycle.
That would make them more road relevant, although it would benefit teams with mech KERS, as mech KERS don't lose as much efficiency as electric batteries.
Anyway, Some extra info. Rules state:
With the exception of one fully charged KERS, the total amount of recoverable energy stored on the car must not exceed 300kJ. Any which may be recovered at a rate greater than 2kW must not exceed 20kJ.
The maximum power, in or out, of any KERS must not exceed 60kW (81bhp). Energy released from the KERS may not exceed 400kJ in any one lap. Measurements will be taken at the connection to the rear wheel drive train.
Any KERS may only be capable of increasing the stored energy whilst the car is moving on the track. Release of power from any such system must remain under the complete control of the driver at all times the car is on the track.
Cars must be fitted with homologated sensors which provide all necessary signals to the SDR in order to verify the requirements above are being respected.
Any components required as part of a KERS will be controled by the SECU
(remember that KW= KJ/s , that meansPower=Energy/s )
Hopefully in 2010 or 2011 there will be the possibility to use another KERS for the front axle, which will improve the boost power and at the same time reduce fuel comsuption. A win-win situation.
ABout BMW, yeah they are fully commited. You just need to take a look at their road cars lately. They are pioneering the car efficiency. With their "EfficientDynamics" they are making their car the less fuel-comsumers of their range (that means at equal power, the need less fuel than any rival). ANd they apply it to all their series.
They use stuff like active aerodynamics, brake energy regeneration (in reality its a automatically disengageable battery and pumps), autos start and stop, etc.
You can find more info about it at http://www.bmw.com/com/en/insights/technology/efficient_dynamics/phase_2/technologies/overview.html
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 17 Jul, 2008 13:32 | Report |
|
BMWF1Talk Moderator |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Poland Posts: 1585 |
| 17 Jul, 2008 20:36 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
RedBull factory was on fire due to battery failure.
[www.autosport.com]
In the meantime, BMW tested KERS for the first time in a private track at Miramas for about 50 km. Apparently the test ran smoothly without any problems.
¨ It was very positive ¨, quoted from Mario Theissen. Asked cheeckily about whether the team had encountered similar fire at Redbull, Mario responded, ¨No, no serious stuff ¨
[www.autosport.com]
[www.autosport.com]
In the meantime, BMW tested KERS for the first time in a private track at Miramas for about 50 km. Apparently the test ran smoothly without any problems.
¨ It was very positive ¨, quoted from Mario Theissen. Asked cheeckily about whether the team had encountered similar fire at Redbull, Mario responded, ¨No, no serious stuff ¨
[www.autosport.com]
Reply•Quote
| 17 Jul, 2008 21:31 | Report |
|
BMWF1Talk Moderator |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Poland Posts: 1585 |
| 18 Jul, 2008 05:17 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
I'm sorry, there was no info about the driver.
Regardless, more details about the Redbull fire. Apparently the KERS unit overheated the lithium ion battery which led to a small fire but the smoke was alarming.
Mario went on to comment about KERS safety and he said BMW are confident that it will be under control. The only thing is - yikes ! the fuel tank will be more at risk of untoward incidents ( batteries under the fuel tank ).
Regardless, more details about the Redbull fire. Apparently the KERS unit overheated the lithium ion battery which led to a small fire but the smoke was alarming.
Mario went on to comment about KERS safety and he said BMW are confident that it will be under control. The only thing is - yikes ! the fuel tank will be more at risk of untoward incidents ( batteries under the fuel tank ).
Reply•Quote
| 19 Jul, 2008 07:19 | Report |
|
zdzisio (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 45 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Quote:barteks
I didn't know BMW has a private track
Who was at the wheel?
Does it count to testing mileage?
it wasn't Kubica
Quote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69201
Q: There is a rumour that you tried a KERS system.
RK: "Myself, no. I didn't try it."
Reply•Quote
| 19 Jul, 2008 17:01 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
| 19 Jul, 2008 21:10 | Report |
|
gturner (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 1221 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Quote:Talk about cost cutting measures. I've found from other sites that those battery cost USD$400,000 per installation and they're lithium, have limited duty cycles ( only two-hour peak performance race and no more ). In other words, they need to be "thrown away" after each race.
Is that two hours of charging and discharging, or only two hours of providing power? If it's the latter, then a battery should last up to 8 races (6 sec/lap for about 150 laps/gp weekend). Either way, this is one of the suggestions that the manufacturers made to the FIA, so this is clearly how they want to spend their money rather than on some of the less road car oriented technologies.
"Speed has never killed anyone, suddenly becoming stationary... That's what gets you."-Jeremy Clarkson
Reply•Quote
| 19 Jul, 2008 21:46 | Report |
|
German Rocket (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 771 |
| 22 Jul, 2008 11:26 | Report |
|
pgj (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 7236 |
| 22 Jul, 2008 13:20 | Report |
|
El_Kadafi (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: PL Posts: 254 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
KERS killing! 
http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=43442
“During testing of the KERS car at the Jerez track this morning, there was an incident involving a mechanic.
When the car returned to the pits, he touched it and suffered an electric shock.
He sustained slight injuries to his left hand and grazing on his left arm."
http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=43442
“During testing of the KERS car at the Jerez track this morning, there was an incident involving a mechanic.
When the car returned to the pits, he touched it and suffered an electric shock.
He sustained slight injuries to his left hand and grazing on his left arm."
Reply•Quote
| 22 Jul, 2008 16:42 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
Too bad. And it caused the team to lose almsot 1 entire test day. Add to that the long night engineers in the factory will have tonight, investigating and testing about the issue and searching for solutions.
BTW, ABout that car tested the F1.07 the sidepods are totally new. They are squared in their shape, but the air inlets have a curved shape, and quite small indeed.
I wonder if its that BMW will place some parts of the KERS (the batteries) there (which could explain why the mechanic sufferred that electric shock after touching the sidepod, and would explain too that rectangular transparent thing in the lower part of the sidepod), or it is down to some of the 2009 regs (one of them stipulates that the sidepods will be extended further forward), or new safety regs (regarding lateral impact) or to test reduced aerodynamic efficiency (as diffuser will change, as well as barge boards disappearing, all of whihcinfluences in the sidepod shape design).
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
BTW, ABout that car tested the F1.07 the sidepods are totally new. They are squared in their shape, but the air inlets have a curved shape, and quite small indeed.
I wonder if its that BMW will place some parts of the KERS (the batteries) there (which could explain why the mechanic sufferred that electric shock after touching the sidepod, and would explain too that rectangular transparent thing in the lower part of the sidepod), or it is down to some of the 2009 regs (one of them stipulates that the sidepods will be extended further forward), or new safety regs (regarding lateral impact) or to test reduced aerodynamic efficiency (as diffuser will change, as well as barge boards disappearing, all of whihcinfluences in the sidepod shape design).
BMW Sauber Latest News HERE!
Reply•Quote
| 22 Jul, 2008 19:29 | Report |
|
pgj (IP Logged) Registered User |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Posts: 7236 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
I was wondering about the batteries too, they would not bulk up the side pods without good reason.
It is a pity when any team hits a problem like the one that appeared today. Let's hope that it is quickly identified and resolved. The main thing is that the engineer was not seriously injured.
Williams and proud of it.
It is a pity when any team hits a problem like the one that appeared today. Let's hope that it is quickly identified and resolved. The main thing is that the engineer was not seriously injured.
Williams and proud of it.
Reply•Quote
| 23 Jul, 2008 13:47 | Report |
|
BMW: The Essence of Racing |
Date Joined: Apr, 2007 Location: Spain Posts: 6210 |
Re: BMW reveals 2009 KERS details
SOme more info about BMW's KERS and other stuff:
Theissen: ''The components that were tested at Miramas will have changed a lot come next year.''
On fitting in the system: ''With KERS there are two main challenges. On the one hand there's the weight and the performance. On the other hand there's the packaging - how am I to position all the single components ? These factors will decide whether there'll be an advantage in laptime or not.''
On dividing the work between 2008 and 2009: ''We're still working parallely. It seems that with regard to the design we're mainly working on the new car, in terms of aerodynamics the work is balanced whereas on the testbenches we're almost solely working on 2
Theissen: ''The components that were tested at Miramas will have changed a lot come next year.''
On fitting in the system: ''With KERS there are two main challenges. On the one hand there's the weight and the performance. On the other hand there's the packaging - how am I to position all the single components ? These factors will decide whether there'll be an advantage in laptime or not.''
On dividing the work between 2008 and 2009: ''We're still working parallely. It seems that with regard to the design we're mainly working on the new car, in terms of aerodynamics the work is balanced whereas on the testbenches we're almost solely working on 2