Formula E

Please discuss here all your remarks and pose your questions about all racing series, except Formula One. Both technical and other questions about GP2, Touring cars, IRL, LMS, ...
mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:18 pm

Andres125sx wrote:I don´t like the look of any of those cars either, I actually like FE cars a lot more
It's disappointing, that all almost anyone ever likes is the same as every other formula car. FE cars look like any other formula car, with very little distinguishing factor.

It also seems the everyone only cares about liking a look. With no consideration to other factors. (In the case I suggested: better efficiency/range (and such less weight), safety, less disruption to the race, better reliability/durability)
I keep mentioning the stuff I do (even later in this post) primarily because of performance improvements. As

Andres125sx wrote:About more powerful motors, they can´t be used if battery does not improve.
Yes they can. The cars would just be heavier. For example. Take the Rimac for example: 1,850 kg 800kW power, 82kWh battery, 500km Range. Throw away everything but the batteries motors and transmission. Replace everything else with a formula chassis an other components. You might shed several hundreds of kilos. (It's a large two seater car with lots of superflous stuff. 300-400kg? More? I can't say)
The range would be of course a fraction of the official range. But, cutting down the weight, and with a more aerodynamic car it would be improved a lot (especially if you go with enclosed wheels and a wing car formula).

You can replace the batteries with under-development lithium-sulphur cells, which already provide 150% the energy (might be 200% soon), to cut down battery/car weight further. The technology already exists
Andres125sx wrote:At least if race length is not reduced, what would be a good idea if you ask me. I´d rather prefer a short race with no car change than current formula where first half of the race is almost irrelevant as any time you lost/won in first half can be multiplied by a factor of 10 with a good or bad car change
I'd rather prefer a true grand prix length (300km) race, even if it's with 2-3 swaps.
Your criticism is simply not true with the time limit. In any normal circumstance the driver swaps before the time runs out and waits to start.

godlameroso
126
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Formula E

Post by godlameroso » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:35 pm

We're having trouble getting more than 375 watt hours per kilogram with the best reliable commercial batteries(around the limit for graphite). These new batteries show promise in the lab but it's worth little when in actual conditions the batteries start forming dendrites possibly short circuiting. There's a lot of promising technologies, mostly revolving around the anode and cathode. Lots of research going on with nano structures. There's different materials like silicone which could theoretically store 6 times as many lithium ions as graphite, but the problem with silicone is that it swells up and the structures the lithium intercalates with begin breaking up with continuous cycling. They're trying graphene nano cages to try to allow the lithium to swell to some extent without breaking increasing cycling. This research has been going on for about 5 years now in various other guises. The problem is the intellectual property is too hot, so everyone keeps everything close to their chest, no one shares and progress is slow. It's a shame really.

If giants like Panasonic, and LG, and Sanyo, and whoever else is researching battery tech came together with all their knowledge and research I'm sure we could have 500 watt hour per kilogram energy density with better charge/discharge rates. At that point you're slashing nearly 40% off the weight of current batteries. At that point burning stuff for terrestrial mobility seems stupid.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Fri Jul 22, 2016 11:18 am

godlameroso wrote:We're having trouble getting more than 375 watt hours per kilogram with the best reliable commercial batteries(around the limit for graphite).
As far as I know traditional graphite based batteries plateaued at 200Wh/kg. The sort of stuff Tesla uses. And even this comes with compromise. The electrolyte is flammable.
godlameroso wrote:There's a lot of promising technologies, mostly revolving around the anode and cathode.
I specifically mentioned LiS and Oxis because they have working battery cells at 300+ Wh/kg, even if it's not commercialized.

godlameroso
126
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Formula E

Post by godlameroso » Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:06 pm

The model S uses 3.1 amp hour panasonic 18650 batteries. The model 3 will use 3.4 amp hour batteries, I'm holding my breath until I see a commercial 18650 battery with an actual output of 4 amp hours, that would be HUUUGE.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Fri Jul 22, 2016 6:49 pm

godlameroso wrote:The model S uses 3.1 amp hour panasonic 18650 batteries. The model 3 will use 3.4 amp hour batteries, I'm holding my breath until I see a commercial 18650 battery with an actual output of 4 amp hours, that would be HUUUGE.
(Amp hour is not a unit of energy. )

Andres125sx
214
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:09 pm

mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:I don´t like the look of any of those cars either, I actually like FE cars a lot more
It's disappointing, that all almost anyone ever likes is the same as every other formula car. FE cars look like any other formula car, with very little distinguishing factor.
please do not include me on that group, I've stated earlier in this thread I'd have prefered wingless cars wich would be singular and unique.

But those you posted are not that singular at all, and I personally dont like them
mzso wrote: It also seems the everyone only cares about liking a look. With no consideration to other factors. (In the case I suggested: better efficiency/range (and such less weight), safety, less disruption to the race, better reliability/durability)
I keep mentioning the stuff I do (even later in this post) primarily because of performance improvements.
But you're comparing apples to oranges, as pikes peak cars only need endurance for some minutes. That way it's easier to make a lighter and more efficient car
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:About more powerful motors, they can´t be used if battery does not improve.
Yes they can. The cars would just be heavier. For example. Take the Rimac for example: 1,850 kg 800kW power, 82kWh battery, 500km Range. Throw away everything but the batteries motors and transmission. Replace everything else with a formula chassis an other components. You might shed several hundreds of kilos. (It's a large two seater car with lots of superflous stuff. 300-400kg? More? I can't say)
The range would be of course a fraction of the official range. But, cutting down the weight, and with a more aerodynamic car it would be improved a lot (especially if you go with enclosed wheels and a wing car formula).
And that's what they did, but they're heavy enough yet.

Do you really think Rimac car is better enginered? It does weight more than double a FE car
mzso wrote:You can replace the batteries with under-development lithium-sulphur cells, which already provide 150% the energy (might be 200% soon), to cut down battery/car weight further. The technology already exists
And it's still under development for a reason. Solar Impulse use LiS batteries I think, and they caused several problems.

You cant use standarized batteries wich are not consistent, random battery problems would cause unfair differences
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:At least if race length is not reduced, what would be a good idea if you ask me. I´d rather prefer a short race with no car change than current formula where first half of the race is almost irrelevant as any time you lost/won in first half can be multiplied by a factor of 10 with a good or bad car change
I'd rather prefer a true grand prix length (300km) race, even if it's with 2-3 swaps.
so costs are multiplied by 2?

I don't see any need for FE to be similar ro F1. When battery technology allow it it will be great, but that's not posible yet, so trying to copy F1 format right now IMO would be a huge mistake

Jolle
55
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Formula E

Post by Jolle » Mon Jul 25, 2016 7:36 am

Andres125sx wrote:
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:I don´t like the look of any of those cars either, I actually like FE cars a lot more
It's disappointing, that all almost anyone ever likes is the same as every other formula car. FE cars look like any other formula car, with very little distinguishing factor.
please do not include me on that group, I've stated earlier in this thread I'd have prefered wingless cars wich would be singular and unique.

But those you posted are not that singular at all, and I personally dont like them
mzso wrote: It also seems the everyone only cares about liking a look. With no consideration to other factors. (In the case I suggested: better efficiency/range (and such less weight), safety, less disruption to the race, better reliability/durability)
I keep mentioning the stuff I do (even later in this post) primarily because of performance improvements.
But you're comparing apples to oranges, as pikes peak cars only need endurance for some minutes. That way it's easier to make a lighter and more efficient car
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:About more powerful motors, they can´t be used if battery does not improve.
Yes they can. The cars would just be heavier. For example. Take the Rimac for example: 1,850 kg 800kW power, 82kWh battery, 500km Range. Throw away everything but the batteries motors and transmission. Replace everything else with a formula chassis an other components. You might shed several hundreds of kilos. (It's a large two seater car with lots of superflous stuff. 300-400kg? More? I can't say)
The range would be of course a fraction of the official range. But, cutting down the weight, and with a more aerodynamic car it would be improved a lot (especially if you go with enclosed wheels and a wing car formula).
And that's what they did, but they're heavy enough yet.

Do you really think Rimac car is better enginered? It does weight more than double a FE car
mzso wrote:You can replace the batteries with under-development lithium-sulphur cells, which already provide 150% the energy (might be 200% soon), to cut down battery/car weight further. The technology already exists
And it's still under development for a reason. Solar Impulse use LiS batteries I think, and they caused several problems.

You cant use standarized batteries wich are not consistent, random battery problems would cause unfair differences
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:At least if race length is not reduced, what would be a good idea if you ask me. I´d rather prefer a short race with no car change than current formula where first half of the race is almost irrelevant as any time you lost/won in first half can be multiplied by a factor of 10 with a good or bad car change
I'd rather prefer a true grand prix length (300km) race, even if it's with 2-3 swaps.
so costs are multiplied by 2?

I don't see any need for FE to be similar ro F1. When battery technology allow it it will be great, but that's not posible yet, so trying to copy F1 format right now IMO would be a huge mistake
I think there is a pretty good reason why all cars look the way they do. With the current e-technology the cars are out of balance for a formula car with wings. Too heavy, not enough power.

If you would design a car, that would be as efficient as possible around a track with the storage and length provides, you properly wouldn't get anything looking like an exciting racing car but more something that looks like the shell-Eco-challenge.

One of the things they want to get from formula E is that E-Power is sexy. That's why they have futuristic looking cars with wings (but almost no downforce or drag) to look fast, hard tires to make to cars act like they have a lot of power and a kind of all-star from yesterday field. That combined with races where no series could race, right in the town centres, it's just one big (but fun) PR stunt (and it's working).

In a few years time, with increasing power and storage, it's quite possible that the teams will get more and more liberty to design their own and we'll get a proper racing series! When that time arrived, it might be a challenger for WEC to lure away manufacturers to promote their technology. Just imagine, for a similar budget for the 24h of les mans, you'll get 12 prime time races, in 12 different city centres, new tech, etc etc.

Andres125sx
214
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:33 pm

To me flat wings have sense on gp3 cars so they look similar to f1 and settings are similar zo young drivers get used to that format, but I think FE should be different, so I dont see any reason to make similar cars.

AM-RB001 is a new concept I'd have loved to see in FE. Ignore F1 rulebook wich is the responsible for F1 cars to look the way they do, and build a car with current aero knolege from scratch. Actally even AM-RB001 is conditioned by street cars rules, so for FE they could have been even more innovative

Shame they didnt...

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:36 pm

Andres125sx wrote:But you're comparing apples to oranges, as pikes peak cars only need endurance for some minutes. That way it's easier to make a lighter and more efficient car
The body design is not relevant to this.
Andres125sx wrote:please do not include me on that group, I've stated earlier in this thread I'd have prefered wingless cars wich would be singular and unique.
Well, imagine those Pikes Peak cars without wings. :)
Andres125sx wrote:And that's what they did, but they're heavy enough yet.

Do you really think Rimac car is better enginered? It does weight more than double a FE car
WTF are you talking about? They have a measly 200kW-s of power. (Even that only on qualifying)
Also with that much higher battery capacity and two seats, five times the power, windshields, etc it's only 1850kg. So it likely is better engineered.
Andres125sx wrote:And it's still under development for a reason. Solar Impulse use LiS batteries I think, and they caused several problems.

You cant use standarized batteries wich are not consistent, random battery problems would cause unfair differences
This is just a BS excuse. It works it exist. One of the few values of racing is that it supports the development of new technologies. Unfair differences? Have you watch any racing, ever?
Andres125sx wrote:so costs are multiplied by 2?

I don't see any need for FE to be similar ro F1. When battery technology allow it it will be great, but that's not posible yet, so trying to copy F1 format right now IMO would be a huge mistake
This isn't copying F1. It's normal for high profile racing series.

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:40 pm

Jolle wrote: I think there is a pretty good reason why all cars look the way they do. With the current e-technology the cars are out of balance for a formula car with wings. Too heavy, not enough power.

If you would design a car, that would be as efficient as possible around a track with the storage and length provides, you properly wouldn't get anything looking like an exciting racing car but more something that looks like the shell-Eco-challenge.

One of the things they want to get from formula E is that E-Power is sexy. That's why they have futuristic looking cars with wings (but almost no downforce or drag) to look fast, hard tires to make to cars act like they have a lot of power and a kind of all-star from yesterday field. That combined with races where no series could race, right in the town centres, it's just one big (but fun) PR stunt (and it's working).

In a few years time, with increasing power and storage, it's quite possible that the teams will get more and more liberty to design their own and we'll get a proper racing series! When that time arrived, it might be a challenger for WEC to lure away manufacturers to promote their technology. Just imagine, for a similar budget for the 24h of les mans, you'll get 12 prime time races, in 12 different city centres, new tech, etc etc.
WFT are you talking about? The wings are not there for decoration the provide a lot of downforce.
How in earth are they futuristic. They look like every other formula car in the past few decades...

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:47 pm

Andres125sx wrote:To me flat wings have sense on gp3 cars so they look similar to f1 and settings are similar zo young drivers get used to that format, but I think FE should be different, so I dont see any reason to make similar cars.

AM-RB001 is a new concept I'd have loved to see in FE. Ignore F1 rulebook wich is the responsible for F1 cars to look the way they do, and build a car with current aero knolege from scratch. Actally even AM-RB001 is conditioned by street cars rules, so for FE they could have been even more innovative

Shame they didnt...
Seriously? ...
Such are junk is the last thing you should want. That's what's ruined F1. (Apart from corruption)
It's morbidly expensive designing such twisted/convoluted shaped cars and it's also useless, with no real world connection. The cars become expensive, ugly aero toys. Even worse, it results in the oppression of relevant technologies, with real life significance. (Another reason why a pretty straight forward wing-car aero formula would be nice)

Jolle
55
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Formula E

Post by Jolle » Mon Jul 25, 2016 7:08 pm

mzso wrote:
Jolle wrote: I think there is a pretty good reason why all cars look the way they do. With the current e-technology the cars are out of balance for a formula car with wings. Too heavy, not enough power.

If you would design a car, that would be as efficient as possible around a track with the storage and length provides, you properly wouldn't get anything looking like an exciting racing car but more something that looks like the shell-Eco-challenge.

One of the things they want to get from formula E is that E-Power is sexy. That's why they have futuristic looking cars with wings (but almost no downforce or drag) to look fast, hard tires to make to cars act like they have a lot of power and a kind of all-star from yesterday field. That combined with races where no series could race, right in the town centres, it's just one big (but fun) PR stunt (and it's working).

In a few years time, with increasing power and storage, it's quite possible that the teams will get more and more liberty to design their own and we'll get a proper racing series! When that time arrived, it might be a challenger for WEC to lure away manufacturers to promote their technology. Just imagine, for a similar budget for the 24h of les mans, you'll get 12 prime time races, in 12 different city centres, new tech, etc etc.
WFT are you talking about? The wings are not there for decoration the provide a lot of downforce.
How in earth are they futuristic. They look like every other formula car in the past few decades...
About this, wing level at for instance Monaco.
Image

Looks like the only thing the "wings" do is drag.

rscsr
43
User avatar
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:02 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Formula E

Post by rscsr » Mon Jul 25, 2016 7:45 pm

In my opinion they should look a lot more like that:

Image

of course without the open engine area, and afaik Sidepods would produce less drag than a front mounted radiator.

Andres125sx
214
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:42 pm

mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:But you're comparing apples to oranges, as pikes peak cars only need endurance for some minutes. That way it's easier to make a lighter and more efficient car
The body design is not relevant to this.
obviously, but you were talking about effiency and endurance...
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:And it's still under development for a reason. Solar Impulse use LiS batteries I think, and they caused several problems.

You cant use standarized batteries wich are not consistent, random battery problems would cause unfair differences
This is just a BS excuse. It works it exist. One of the few values of racing is that it supports the development of new technologies. Unfair differences? Have you watch any racing, ever?
It exists is not the same to it works. Can you point me to some applicaton where they are used with similar discharge rates combined with fast charging (harvesting)?.

Have you ever noticed FE batteries are standarized? Standarized components must be reliable and consistent. LiS batteries are not yet.
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:please do not include me on that group, I've stated earlier in this thread I'd have prefered wingless cars wich would be singular and unique.
Well, imagine those Pikes Peak cars withot wings
[quote/]
ugly

Andres125sx
214
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:45 pm

mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:To me flat wings have sense on gp3 cars so they look similar to f1 and settings are similar zo young drivers get used to that format, but I think FE should be different, so I dont see any reason to make similar cars.

AM-RB001 is a new concept I'd have loved to see in FE. Ignore F1 rulebook wich is the responsible for F1 cars to look the way they do, and build a car with current aero knolege from scratch. Actally even AM-RB001 is conditioned by street cars rules, so for FE they could have been even more innovative

Shame they didnt...
Seriously? ...
Such are junk is the last thing you should want. That's what's ruined F1. (Apart from corruption)
It's morbidly expensive designing such twisted/convoluted shaped cars and it's also useless, with no real world connection. The cars become expensive, ugly aero toys. Even worse, it results in the oppression of relevant technologies, with real life significance. (Another reason why a pretty straight forward wing-car aero formula would be nice)
Are you seriously saying innovation ruined F1? #-o



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 0 guests