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, ...
Pierce89
93
User avatar
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by Pierce89 » Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:04 pm

theriusDR3 wrote:will Minardi join Formula E in the future?
Not with a $20m entry bond. No real Minardi and no Stoddart Minardi.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970

“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher

Pierce89
93
User avatar
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by Pierce89 » Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:07 pm

mzso wrote:
Pierce89 wrote:Really? Pathetic. Overtaking in NASCAR is all about cornering speed just like any other race series. What you speak of literally only applies to 11% percent of races(restrictor plates). Hell 5% of the races are identical to Australian v8 supercars. Maybe we should use that to sterotype the series instead of your version. It would be just as accurate.
Now that you say so, I agree. Nascar is pathetic. :D
There aren't even any corners on the majority of tracks just a big boring looping bend.
I can't say much about V8 supercars because it was never broadcasted here. But taking a peak at it it looks like not one of the circuits is a true BS oval. (The Queensland Raceway looks to be the closest) I highly doubt that racing has much similarity.
Way off topic again, but Nascar puts on road races that are practically indistinguishable from a v8 Supercar race.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970

“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher

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

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:23 pm

I'm guessing either the CGI models are inaccurate, or the label. Because whenever direct drive was specified the it was clear that it would be impossible that way, because no, drive shaft could go connect the motors to the wheel from that position. Do they mean constant gear ratio by "direct drive"?

Pierce89
93
User avatar
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by Pierce89 » Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:35 pm

mzso wrote:
I'm guessing either the CGI models are inaccurate, or the label. Because whenever direct drive was specified the it was clear that it would be impossible that way, because no, drive shaft could go connect the motors to the wheel from that position. Do they mean constant gear ratio by "direct drive"?
You are correct. The rules require a gearbox, so they're building single speed boxes.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970

“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher

scarbs
334
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:47 am
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Formula E

Post by scarbs » Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:14 pm

Pierce89 wrote:
mzso wrote:
I'm guessing either the CGI models are inaccurate, or the label. Because whenever direct drive was specified the it was clear that it would be impossible that way, because no, drive shaft could go connect the motors to the wheel from that position. Do they mean constant gear ratio by "direct drive"?
You are correct. The rules require a gearbox, so they're building single speed boxes.
Yes, by direct drive they mean a fixed final drive. A regulation demanding a differential and High motor RPMs mean truue direct drive isnt possible.

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

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:16 pm

Pierce89 wrote:You are correct. The rules require a gearbox, so they're building single speed boxes.
scarbs wrote:Yes, by direct drive they mean a fixed final drive. A regulation demanding a differential and High motor RPMs mean true direct drive isn't possible.
That's sad... The rules should forbid a gearbox, so that engineers would seek out ways of minimizing weight and maximizing efficiency in true direct-drive layouts.
They don't mention batteries so I guess they're still standardized uninnovative batteries.

Also fully regenerative breaks would be nice. For the back wheels at least. They'd probably need 4WD for fully electric braking. Unless the figure out some neat light weight brakes.
I guess an Eddy current like brake might be possible, where they actually use the current induced and not just let it form eddies. (aka Homopolar motor) It would still heat up severely, but for a break that 's not really an issue.

RicME85
58
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:11 pm
Location: Derby

Re: Formula E

Post by RicME85 » Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:43 pm

McLaren are producing the batteries for the 17/18 season which will have a higher output and higher harvest capacity.
The battery hasnt been on the 'roadmap' as they didnt want an arms race to produce the best batteries, they wanted to keep costs down and to give battery technology time to mature a bit more. They changed the plans to have open battery and chassis manufacturers from season 5, keeping things single make.

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

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Mon Nov 14, 2016 8:52 pm

RicME85 wrote:McLaren are producing the batteries for the 17/18 season which will have a higher output and higher harvest capacity.
The battery hasnt been on the 'roadmap' as they didnt want an arms race to produce the best batteries, they wanted to keep costs down and to give battery technology time to mature a bit more. They changed the plans to have open battery and chassis manufacturers from season 5, keeping things single make.
It's like removing most of the purpose of a series like this... They claim to promote the development of electric drivetrains.

The most important part of it is actually the battery. That was, is and for the foreseeable future remain the greatest weakness of EVs. It's expensive, it degrades, it has sorely limited capacity.

They could have more battery technologies by limiting cost. If they made a sort-of controlled mini market where battery manufacturers could offer/sell their batteries at the same price (with a price cap) for everyone. And the teams could replace them every few races. Of course it would be a bit more expensive, but it'd serve a purpose.

Jolle
72
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Formula E

Post by Jolle » Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:49 pm

mzso wrote:
RicME85 wrote:McLaren are producing the batteries for the 17/18 season which will have a higher output and higher harvest capacity.
The battery hasnt been on the 'roadmap' as they didnt want an arms race to produce the best batteries, they wanted to keep costs down and to give battery technology time to mature a bit more. They changed the plans to have open battery and chassis manufacturers from season 5, keeping things single make.
It's like removing most of the purpose of a series like this... They claim to promote the development of electric drivetrains.

The most important part of it is actually the battery. That was, is and for the foreseeable future remain the greatest weakness of EVs. It's expensive, it degrades, it has sorely limited capacity.

They could have more battery technologies by limiting cost. If they made a sort-of controlled mini market where battery manufacturers could offer/sell their batteries at the same price (with a price cap) for everyone. And the teams could replace them every few races. Of course it would be a bit more expensive, but it'd serve a purpose.
They are building a base first, getting the big companies in (like Audi, Mercedes, Renault and Jaguar) by giving them a perfect marketing platform. Exciting races in city centres, only possible with fairly evenly matched electric racing cars. To make it look a bit more spectacular they gave them hard tires and (almost) none functional wings. I think, because it's first and most of all a marketing circus, tech development will be confined and well planned.

Andres125sx
254
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:09 am

mzso wrote:
RicME85 wrote:McLaren are producing the batteries for the 17/18 season which will have a higher output and higher harvest capacity.
The battery hasnt been on the 'roadmap' as they didnt want an arms race to produce the best batteries, they wanted to keep costs down and to give battery technology time to mature a bit more. They changed the plans to have open battery and chassis manufacturers from season 5, keeping things single make.
It's like removing most of the purpose of a series like this... They claim to promote the development of electric drivetrains.

The most important part of it is actually the battery. That was, is and for the foreseeable future remain the greatest weakness of EVs. It's expensive, it degrades, it has sorely limited capacity.

They could have more battery technologies by limiting cost. If they made a sort-of controlled mini market where battery manufacturers could offer/sell their batteries at the same price (with a price cap) for everyone. And the teams could replace them every few races. Of course it would be a bit more expensive, but it'd serve a purpose.
You´re talking like if manufacturing and developing a new battery would be similar to manufacturing and developing a suspension or engine :shock:

Batteries are not a mechanical part, batteries are chemistry and need a lot more development and testing, the risks of using underdeveloped solutions are much higher, and the developing process require years instead of weeks/months.

A FE battery battle will change nothing compared to current situation where all battery manufacturers are squeezing all their brains to get a new gen battery wich would bring them billions benefit if they manage to beat their competitors and become the standard battery for any electric car, bike, laptop, mobile... FE would change nothing for them, it´s peanuts

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

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:06 pm

Andres125sx wrote:
mzso wrote:
RicME85 wrote:McLaren are producing the batteries for the 17/18 season which will have a higher output and higher harvest capacity.
The battery hasnt been on the 'roadmap' as they didnt want an arms race to produce the best batteries, they wanted to keep costs down and to give battery technology time to mature a bit more. They changed the plans to have open battery and chassis manufacturers from season 5, keeping things single make.
It's like removing most of the purpose of a series like this... They claim to promote the development of electric drivetrains.

The most important part of it is actually the battery. That was, is and for the foreseeable future remain the greatest weakness of EVs. It's expensive, it degrades, it has sorely limited capacity.

They could have more battery technologies by limiting cost. If they made a sort-of controlled mini market where battery manufacturers could offer/sell their batteries at the same price (with a price cap) for everyone. And the teams could replace them every few races. Of course it would be a bit more expensive, but it'd serve a purpose.
You´re talking like if manufacturing and developing a new battery would be similar to manufacturing and developing a suspension or engine :shock:

Batteries are not a mechanical part, batteries are chemistry and need a lot more development and testing, the risks of using underdeveloped solutions are much higher, and the developing process require years instead of weeks/months.

A FE battery battle will change nothing compared to current situation where all battery manufacturers are squeezing all their brains to get a new gen battery wich would bring them billions benefit if they manage to beat their competitors and become the standard battery for any electric car, bike, laptop, mobile... FE would change nothing for them, it´s peanuts
You're over mystifying things as always...
It would help everyone, but especially small startups with prototypes to get some recognition. It would prove a technology which big words and studies don't do.

Andres125sx
254
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:18 pm

Can you please tell me one single motivation for a battery manufacturer to improve batteries for FE wich would not bring him a much higher reward in real world use?

Jolle
72
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Formula E

Post by Jolle » Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:28 pm

Andres125sx wrote:Can you please tell me one single motivation for a battery manufacturer to improve batteries for FE wich would not bring him a much higher reward in real world use?
it's a good deal to finance R&D and set up a production line in a growing and competitive market.

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

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Tue Nov 15, 2016 3:42 pm

Andres125sx wrote:Can you please tell me one single motivation for a battery manufacturer to improve batteries for FE wich would not bring him a much higher reward in real world use?
Something that's usable for FE might be far off from a consumer battery: experimental, too costly, etc.
But it would serve to get some funding via the teams and some recognition, advertisement. It would especially help small startups that have battery tech with great potential (which isn't only good on paper).
It would help them to sell, license it, or be bought off by larger companies. All in all helping to get the tech out there.

Andres125sx
254
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:54 am

Sorry but I don´t think that´s real.

A battery is a fundamental part of any electric setup, wich means an experimental battery with unknown problems will ruin the season of any team willing to assume the risk, as any problem with the battery is an automatic DNF and prototype batteries tend to fail

To use a new battery on FE it must be proved and tested, and if any manufacturer have a new battery proved and tested it is ready or almost ready for the market, and releasing a new battery to the market will bring the manufacturer uncomparable benefits.

Take for example LiS batteries, they´re still under development, on the phase of prototype testing on, for example, Solar Impulse. It has suffered some fire I think, or at least some battery problems because they´re still under development. On a FE car that would be even more problematic as the charging and discharging rates are higher, so I don´t think any racing team is willing to assume the risk of ruining his whole season while developing some new battery