The Case for KERS?

[Sean Malone]

I think everyone but maybe Kimi himself attributed his win in Spa to the extra ponies afforded by the KERS system. I'm neither for nor against KERS per se, I don't want to see the the rules force teams to use KERS.
As I watched the Spa race I was wondering if they could use a 'KERS Lite', a single shot of boost to be used at the start of the race (or anytime the driver feels they really need it) and then it just becomes dead weight, but maybe a smaller single shot system could be built where the dead weight would offset the benefit. As we know, getting to the front in an F1 race at the start is often the difference between winning and not.
Basically it might be interesting to see a few different version of KERS that teams may choose to use. Just thinking out loud trying to kill a Monday afternoon.:) The more customer engines and stagnate rules become the norm, KERS could be an area where the engineers can implement some interesting versions.

[stroker]

Just give 'em a shot of nitrous oxide.

[Sean Malone]

Just give 'em a shot of nitrous oxide.

Why can't thing be that simple!!??:thumbup:

[Methanolandbrats]

Build a motor with so much torque you're afraid to use it. Ya know, wheelspin at 150 mph. That eliminates the need for gimmics

[mapguy]

Build a motor with so much torque you're afraid to use it. Ya know, wheelspin at 150 mph. That eliminates the need for gimmics

:thumbup:

[pchall]

:thumbup:

:thumbup::thumbup:

[opinionated ow]

:thumbup::thumbup:

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

(that mean 3L, any number of cylinder, natural aspiration and no stupid bloody rev limit or engine life requirements)

[oddlycalm]

Build a motor with so much torque you're afraid to use it. Ya know, wheelspin at 150 mph. That eliminates the need for gimmics

That's always been my opinion. Rear tire life does a fine job of limiting how the driver uses full power.

oc

[miatanut]

That's always been my opinion. Rear tire life does a fine job of limiting how the driver uses full power.

oc

I agree, but KERS is something which can be useful in road cars. Where they screwed everything up was when they put all the limitations on KERS.

How about an air restrictor what would keep the engine power about where it is now, and the sky's the limit on KERS?

[opinionated ow]

I agree, but KERS is something which can be useful in road cars. Where they screwed everything up was when they put all the limitations on KERS.

How about an air restrictor what would keep the engine power about where it is now, and the sky's the limit on KERS?

Or how about not. This is formula 1 not ecomentalism racing :shakehead

[miatanut]

You were born about three decades too late.

Must be a bitch!

[Methanolandbrats]

I agree, but KERS is something which can be useful in road cars. Correct, bolt it on the hauler.

[miatanut]

I find the whole 'the racing is about the drivers' racetainment thing boring. I would much rather it be about advancing technology with the cars. Like it used to be. If one teams kicks everybody else's ass with something better, and wins by a whole lap, so be it. Everybody else has their work cut out for them.

To each his his own, I guess.

[opinionated ow]

I find the whole 'the racing is about the drivers' racetainment thing boring. I would much rather it be about advancing technology with the cars. Like it used to be. If one teams kicks everybody else's ass with something better, and wins by a whole lap, so be it. Everybody else has their work cut out for them.

To each his his own, I guess.

Where did either of us talk about "racertainment?" I'm pretty sure meth is like me and hates spec racing, but I also hate gimmicks invented to shut up morons. KERS is in the same boat as push to pass, control tyres, mandated option tyres and spec ECUs-gimmickry that are ruining motorsport. IF the KERS had been a loophole in the rules and someone had exploited it to gain an advantage then fair enough. But it was included only to shut up the ecomentalists and then to minimise the losses for those without it, it was limited to 6.6s per lap. It went from being a technical breakthrough to an expensive push to block system-a complete waste of time and money except to say to the ecomentalists "hey look a ferrari hybrid." It makes me sick...

[jcollins28]

Build a motor with so much torque you're afraid to use it. Ya know, wheelspin at 150 mph. That eliminates the need for gimmics

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Porsche_917C.jpg

[Methanolandbrats]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Porsche_917C.jpg

Yup, that is an actual race car. :thumbup:

[oddlycalm]

I find the whole 'the racing is about the drivers' racetainment thing boring. I would much rather it be about advancing technology with the cars. Like it used to be.
Agreed in principle, but KERS isn't advanced technology, it's dumbed down technology. Commercial automotive hybrid systems are far more advanced. There is zero spill over into the commercial domain and the cost is silly for what little it delivers. There are also safety issues.

oc

[miatanut]

Where did either of us talk about "racertainment?" I'm pretty sure meth is like me and hates spec racing, but I also hate gimmicks invented to shut up morons. KERS is in the same boat as push to pass, control tyres, mandated option tyres and spec ECUs-gimmickry that are ruining motorsport. IF the KERS had been a loophole in the rules and someone had exploited it to gain an advantage then fair enough. But it was included only to shut up the ecomentalists and then to minimise the losses for those without it, it was limited to 6.6s per lap. It went from being a technical breakthrough to an expensive push to block system-a complete waste of time and money except to say to the ecomentalists "hey look a ferrari hybrid." It makes me sick...

'it belongs on the transporter while the race car uses the same old same old twin overhead cam internal combustion engine approach which has been around for 97 years' is the racetainment approach. The only problem with KERS was the limits which were put on it in order to maintain the status quo.


Agreed in principle, but KERS isn't advanced technology, it's dumbed down technology. Commercial automotive hybrid systems are far more advanced. There is zero spill over into the commercial domain and the cost is silly for what little it delivers. There are also safety issues.

oc
I was really looking forward to the Williams flywheel, but they haven't raced it. They can get energy into it and out of it a lot faster than the battery approach, and with higher efficiency.

That's the kind of thing F1 should be developing.

[mueber]

I saw KERS as a politically correct gimmick from the start, an added expense that added absolutely nothing.

[Methanolandbrats]

I find the whole 'the racing is about the drivers' racetainment thing boring. I would much rather it be about advancing technology with the cars. Like it used to be. If one teams kicks everybody else's ass with something better, and wins by a whole lap, so be it. Everybody else has their work cut out for them.

To each his his own, I guess. I never said anything about "racetainment", whatever the hell that means. Racing is the synergy of man and machine, both must contribute. The only goal of pure racing is to lap as quickly as possible. Many racing technologies born from pure racing have filtered down to road cars. The difference now is that there is a push to have racing viewed as a test bed for road cars. If that becomes the main goal, racing is dead. Another aspect of the current problem is "green racing". If that becomes more important than going fast, then racing is dead.

Please define "like it used to be". I lived through Jim Hall's wing and other innovations in aerodnamics in CanAm and sportscars. Many unusual one-offs at Indy, the turbo era in F1, the active cars, V10s that revved to over 20,000rpm, an incredible technological breakthrough. All of those examples of technological innovation resulted in periods of dominance when the machine was mated with that rare driver who could drive it at the limit. There I agree with you that if a team and driver figure it out and win by half-a-lap for two years, fine, they earned it. It's up to the other teams to catch up. But that only happens when rules are somewhat free and stable for years, it does'nt happen when the governing body freezes most everything, but adds a gimmic or two, sometimes for political reasons. The current KERS, option tires, push to pass, etc.... are example of gimmics thrown in to disguise the fact that true innovation has been choked off.

[gerhard911]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Porsche_917C.jpg

Any true race car should scare the livin' $h|t out of it's dribbers :lama:

[emjaya]

I saw KERS as a politically correct gimmick from the start, an added expense that added absolutely nothing.


http://www.gizmag.com/formula-one-kers/11324/


McLaren actually developed a KERS system in 1999. Mario Illien created a system for Mercedes in 1999 that used hydraulic fluid pressure to recover energy lost in braking. It would have provided a 45bhp power boost for four seconds but could have been used many times per lap.

This years version is a PC gimmick, maybe, but if Mercedes had been allowed to run their KERS in 1999, it would not have been a gimmick, but a technical innovation that added horsepower to the car.



Agreed in principle, but KERS isn't advanced technology, it's dumbed down technology. Commercial automotive hybrid systems are far more advanced. There is zero spill over into the commercial domain and the cost is silly for what little it delivers. There are also safety issues.

oc


In fact half the teams on the grid, including front runners Ferrari and Renault, have opted to use the Electric KERS system developed by Italian Auto electrical supplier Magnetti Marelli.

Magnetti Marelli seem to think there is some merit in developing a KERS. Ferrari are using the KERS that Magnetti Marelli had already developed.

There has been a KERS for trucks in Australia for over twenty years. I think it was a flywheel based system, I'll have to seach for it, but it was to replace the exhaust brake as far as I remember. There's a lot of energy wasted in stopping a truck.

[miatanut]

I never said anything about "racetainment", whatever the hell that means. Racing is the synergy of man and machine, both must contribute. The only goal of pure racing is to lap as quickly as possible. Many racing technologies born from pure racing have filtered down to road cars. The difference now is that there is a push to have racing viewed as a test bed for road cars. If that becomes the main goal, racing is dead. Another aspect of the current problem is "green racing". If that becomes more important than going fast, then racing is dead.

Please define "like it used to be". I lived through Jim Hall's wing and other innovations in aerodnamics in CanAm and sportscars. Many unusual one-offs at Indy, the turbo era in F1, the active cars, V10s that revved to over 20,000rpm, an incredible technological breakthrough. All of those examples of technological innovation resulted in periods of dominance when the machine was mated with that rare driver who could drive it at the limit. There I agree with you that if a team and driver figure it out and win by half-a-lap for two years, fine, they earned it. It's up to the other teams to catch up. But that only happens when rules are somewhat free and stable for years, it does'nt happen when the governing body freezes most everything, but adds a gimmic or two, sometimes for political reasons. The current KERS, option tires, push to pass, etc.... are example of gimmics thrown in to disguise the fact that true innovation has been choked off.

By "like it used to be" Jim Hall is exactly who I was thinking of. Didn't get to see those cars in person, but I enjoyed reading the articles weeks after the races.

The connection between racing cars and road cars has been broken for many years. Energy recovery is a chance to bring it back, and at the same time improve the racing if it's allowed to be an 'open' technology. Mosley's original proposal was to limit the weight of the system, and beyond that, the sky was the limit. Then F1 politics intervened to protect the status quo and we got the P2P system we have now. If the original proposal hadn't been dumbed-down, we would have gotten much more interesting racing.

In these days of supercomputers but narrowly drawn rules, all rules stability does is reward those with big budgets. If F1 adopted an air restrictor and you could run any kind of engine you wanted, and any kind of energy recovery you wanted, and have 4WD if you wanted, etc, there would be so many variables the supercomputer approach would take too long, the need for a brilliant designer creating innovation would return.

That won't happen, because that would shake-up the status quo. That leaves rules instability as the most likely option to shake things up, as it did at the beginning of this season, and made things the most interesting they have been technically in many years.

[oddlycalm]

If F1 adopted an air restrictor and you could run any kind of engine you wanted, and any kind of energy recovery you wanted, and have 4WD if you wanted, etc, there would be so many variables the supercomputer approach would take too long, the need for a brilliant designer creating innovation would return.

I agree that setting a basic framework of regs and letting the teams innovate from there would be a good way to go. As you point out it's unlikely to happen.

oc

[pchall]

By "like it used to be" Jim Hall is exactly who I was thinking of. Didn't get to see those cars in person, but I enjoyed reading the articles weeks after the races.

"Racing just isn't what it used to be," was about the last thing Jim Hall said to me the final time I spoke to him at a CART race.

As for KERS, its too bad it was implemented so poorly in F1. If teams had been allowed to implement there own systems racing would have been advancing automotive technology in a significant fashion once more. I would like to see what would come it when used in endurance racing if engineers got the necessary freedom to work. A turbo-diesel R15 with KERS could change the face of an industry.

[oddlycalm]

I would like to see what would come it when used in endurance racing if engineers got the necessary freedom to work. A turbo-diesel R15 with KERS could change the face of an industry.

Yep, an industry that in Europe is already moving strongly in that direction.

oc