2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[WhiteBlue]

Right, but your power to weight might be better, or packaging, etc...

I cannot ultimately exclude this but the rules are suspiciously tweaked for a 4 MJ ES.

[WhiteBlue]

The idea is to recover energy and use it.

Ok, so what do you exactly propose? Give me the numbers and I will think about it. If I like it I will tell you. So please:
type of cells and their respective densities?
how much of those cells by mass?
how exactly you propose to manage the loading and unloading during qualifying?

Seriously, what?
Newey would compromise a system so that more often than not it is dead weight?
If it is the same for all KERS equiped cars, then why did you mention the 20s time and 21% "utilisation" factor?
Maybe Newey skimps on cooling a bit, but I doubt very much it is by a factor of 5, as you claim.

If you do not understand the technology and the issue here why do you speculate? The fact of the matter is that you can seriously overload an electric machine of that type that does only 20% of the job it is designed to do. The reason is that the standard rating is based on the heat rejection that must be transported away by the liquid cooling system. If your time rated utilization is only 20% you can almost use five times the power to produce the same reject heat.

How much you actually overload it becomes an issue of how much you value reliability over performance. I happen to believe that Newey will go a bit more towards overloading and overheating than others would do. Giving him a factor of 5 and the others a factor of 3-4 is not out of character. I'm not saying that those factors must necessarily work out in absolute terms. They were just used to demonstrate the nature of the design philosophy. It could be 2.5 for Newey and 1.5-2 for the other teams. He is always doing it that way. Why do you think the Magneti Marelli alternators failed in the Red Bulls but not in the Williams? But this is an issue of opinion.

[Richard]

I think it is fair to presume the RB overheating is due to tighter packaging and possibly overworking the components. I recall Newey saying that he wouldn't let KERS compromise his aero to the point that he threw it away the first time it was introduced.

I also think it fair to assume that the components will only be loaded to a proportion of their peak charge/power, although I haven't a clue what that is a factor of 2 or 20.

I think it is fair to presume that if the regs allow 10MJ per lap (random number!) the peak storage might only be 3MJ because the actual storage comes and goes around the lap.

So combining these things, one could imagine a car with 15MJ storage capacity not using KERS on a Q3 outlap so it carries 10MJ into the final corner and discharges all 10MJ before the line. Then for normal laps it may only charge to 3MJ between each discharge point. That would give a factor of 1.5 in Q3 and then 5 in normal use.

The harvesting & discharge would follow similar principles.

To be honest, all we have are the regs for max storage and power (ie flow out), the rest is guesswork and supposition.


By the way I think I noticed something lost in translation in the last few pages. "Power density" is .... * deleted error*..... I think

[WhiteBlue]

I think it is fair to presume the RB overheating is due to tighter packaging and possibly over working the batteries. I recall Newey saying that he wouldn't let KERS compromise his aero to the point that he threw it away the first time it was introduced.

I also think it fair to assume that the batteries will only be loaded to a proportion of their peak charge, although I haven't a clue what that is a factor of 2 or 20.

Richard the conversation wasn't about the storage cells is was about an electric machine, the KERS MGU!

[Richard]

Corrected my post

[WhiteBlue]

By the way I think I noticed something lost in translation. "Power density" is the storage capacity per kg or volume. "Power" is the rate of electricity flowing in or out, ie P=VA.

Sorry to correct you. Energy density and power density is the correct term for what we are discussing here. They are not translated. Please read one of the sources that I have quoted for the physical properties of the cells that we were discussing. You will find exactly that terms in the original Phd thesis in the English/American language.

[wuzak]

I think it is fair to presume that if the regs allow 10MJ per lap (random number!) the peak storage might only be 3MJ because the actual storage comes and goes around the lap.

Precisely.

[WhiteBlue]

But we have 2 MJ in and 4 MJ out of the ES allowance. ES itself is unlimited. Charge level must not change by more than 4 MJ/lap. So what exactly do you propose to design and how exactly do you propose to use it. Let me do the picking apart for a change.

[wuzak]

You have 2MJ stored, and use recovered energy as you get it.

On a normal race lap you would end up with 2MJ at the end of the lap.

2MJ stored + 2MJ IN - 2MJ OUT = 2MJ left in storage.

On a qualifying lap:

2MJ stored + 2MJ IN - 4MJ OUT = 0 MJ left in strorage.

Note that in either strategy there has to be a lap or more where storage is replenished on track, since it cannot be done in the pits during the race or during qualifying. That's right, you cannot charge the system in the pits or pit garages after the green light comes on in qualifying until the chequered flag. I'm not sure that you can after either, since the cars are under Parc Ferme rules, but I haven't looked at the Sporting Regs.

Actually I hope they don't allow recharging while in Parc Ferme. That would force the teams to run a couple of laps before gridding up - like the old days. I recall watching Schumacher do 4 and 5 laps this way.

I would propose they use batteries. This is familiar technology to them.

The Abstract you posted before says that capacitors have 5% of the enegry density (MJ/m³) and 5% of the specific energy (MJ/kg). Their claim is 5 times that - which would make it 25% for both. That means that a supercapacitor would require 4 times the volume of a battery for the same storage capacity. And space is tight inside the safety cell.

Your calculations showed 109kg for a battery based on 120kW and power density. That would suggest 54.5kg of batteries for the current 60kW system. I don't think that is even close to being right.

So either your power density for batteries is wrong, or it is being used incorrectly.

[Richard]

Sorry to correct you. Energy density and power density is the correct term ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_density and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Power density is how quickly the energy can be transferred (W) per unit volume (or mass) ?
Energy destiny is the storage (J) per unit volume (or mass) ?

[WhiteBlue]

Sorry to correct you. Energy density and power density is the correct term ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_density and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Power density is how quickly the energy can be transferred (W) per unit volume (or mass) ?
Energy destiny is the storage (J) per unit volume (or mass) ?

Yes!
Power density can be per volume or per mass. Predominantly per mass. W/kg or kW/kg or W/L or kW/L (layman terms: charging speed)
Energy density can also be per volume or per mass. Predominantly quoted per mass. It is usually quoted in W.h/kg but I personally prefer MJ/kg because it is easier to compute in the SI system.(layman terms: capacity per weigt)

[WhiteBlue]

Source 1

Source 2

Some sources on the Merc KERS which is regarded as the leading edge KERS technology. Apparently the A123 battery technology can be tweaked between energy density and power density. Initial specs for the 2009 KERS were:
9.3 kW/kg
44 Wh/kg
Those values got modified a lot during development.
Battery weight in the 2009 KERS system of 25 kg was 14.7 kg.

Beside the fact that you can trade energy density for power density it is also relevant how long your power pulses last and the percentage of time you load or unload. The 2013 KERS is very uncritical in that respect. The 2014 ERS will be very difficult because it will be charging or discharging pretty much all the time. So parameters from the 2009-2013 system will not apply.
My estimate for 2014 batteries will be the following combination:
Power Density 5 kW/kg
Energy Density 30 Wh/kg = 0.108 MJ/kg
In reality it is extremely difficult to get reliable data. You really need a data sheet where they plot both densities and the time rate of full power utilization. I don't think you will see that unless you are an F1 engineer.

With the above values you can do a 2.7 MJ battery with 25 kg mass that can handle 125 kW charging power.

If you charge on the out lap and the in lap or leave two recharging laps between quali hot laps you could use 4 MJ from such a 2.7 MJ battery and supply the non engine ancillaries such as the hydraulic pump.

[wuzak]

With the above values you can do a 2.7 MJ battery with 25 kg mass that can handle 125 kW charging power.

If you charge on the out lap and the in lap or leave two recharging laps between quali hot laps you could use 4 MJ from such a 2.7 MJ battery and supply the non engine ancillaries such as the hydraulic pump.

What I have been saying all along.

Would leave some head room in case the car charged more than it discharged from the ES in the initial stages of the lap.

To restore the charge it may be possible to gather part of the charge on the in-lap. And some more on the next out-lap.

And in this instance I would think the MGUH would feed power to the battery rather than directly to the MGUK on in and out laps. The MGUH won't be making anywhere as much power on in or out laps as on a normal lap, but it helps to get the charge up when doing the slower laps.

[FW17]

With the above values you can do a 2.7 MJ battery with 25 kg mass that can handle 125 kW charging power.

If you charge on the out lap and the in lap or leave two recharging laps between quali hot laps you could use 4 MJ from such a 2.7 MJ battery and supply the non engine ancillaries such as the hydraulic pump.

2.7 MJ is 0.75 kWh

125 kW will run for 21 seconds theoretically with this amount of energy.

[WhiteBlue]

With the above values you can do a 2.7 MJ battery with 25 kg mass that can handle 125 kW charging power.

If you charge on the out lap and the in lap or leave two recharging laps between quali hot laps you could use 4 MJ from such a 2.7 MJ battery and supply the non engine ancillaries such as the hydraulic pump.

2.7 MJ is 0.75 kWh

125 kW will run for 21 seconds theoretically with this amount of energy.

It is more complicated than that. We have made an assumption that battery densities can be tweaked sufficiently to design a battery that will be good enough to drain 4 MJ and re charge 2 MJ in the same lap. Hence your calculation does not apply.

But the caveat must be made that such a battery is hypothetical. We have no proof that it is possible. There is no literature giving an indication it is doable. Wuzak claimed it would be possible and I made an educated guess at the properties.

I suspect that in order to make it work you would have to change the way you calculate energy density. Perhaps a section wise charging and discharging battery must be calculated in a different way. Perhaps you need to add the amount of the charge and discharge for the energy density calculation. In that case you need to calculate for a 6 MJ sized battery and it would not be possible to make it work with the above data. But we do not know. Unknown territory. To many variables.