Alternatives for TC

kimi · Post 07 Nov 2007, 14:02

hello

As TC is banned for the next season and may be for many seasons to come, i wonder is there any other alternatives to compensate TC.i mean is there any other way through which we can achieve what TC does?

Thank You.
Cheers!!

Belatti · Post 07 Nov 2007, 14:29

I imagine that a first approach would be to soften rear suspension and working with the diff.
Don´t know if aero modifications would do much cause the biggest problem may be hairpins exit.
Another thing could be working with engine powerband (does current rules allow this?!?!?) to make power come more progressively.

And obviously, drivers have to do they part. Something that could help is working with accelerator softness / stiffnes to improve driver "feeling" of the pedal.

modbaraban · Post 07 Nov 2007, 14:47

Maybe clutch modifications as well. I reckon downshifting while hard braking may be a problem w/o TC. Will there be any use in seamless shift gearboxes in 2008?

kimi · Post 07 Nov 2007, 18:44

Belatti wrote: Another thing could be working with engine powerband (does current rules allow this?!?!?) to make power come more progressively.

what is engine powerband??
can u give a detailed explanation on this??

Carlos · Post 07 Nov 2007, 19:11

From Wikipedia
The power band which refers to the range of operating speeds under which the engine is able to operate efficiently. A typical gasoline automotive engine is capable of operating at a speed of between around 750 and 6000 RPM, but the engine's power band would be more limited. The engine would typically not generate maximum torque until higher operating speeds of perhaps 2500 RPM, after such, the torque drops off. The peak power (horsepower) might be closer to 5000 RPM. Such an engine would be said to have a "power band" of 2500-5000 RPM (another example would be from torque peak to redline: 2500-6000 RPM).

This can be applied to any engine and establishes a reliable quantification of the above notion "the engine is able to operate efficiently".

Complete article & graph at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_band

bettonracing · Post 07 Nov 2007, 21:37

If I understand Your question correctly, You may not see an 'alternative' to TC, primarily due to the standard ECU. The notable thing being that current TC systems sense wheel slip and actively respond by killing power using whatever method is preferred. What You will likely find is teams using the passive methods to regain traction (see above responses).

Manifold pressure 'compensation' seems to be the only available active TC alternative, using the pressure readings to sense engine load (a function of traction). When engine load is reduced ( = wheelspin), adjust the fuel/timing curves to reduce power (compared to 'optimum'). The obvious flaws are reaction time of the system and amount of power loss actually generated. Also, other low load driving situations will be hampered (drivers who stomp the pedal would potentially be rewarded). Effectively, it would be a 'different' fuel/ ignition curve (as opposed to the optimum power curves).

According to this article, (http://www.f1technical.net/articles/7) air pressure compensation is banned as teams started using it to detect vehicle speed with pressure readings from the airbox (as part of their illegal TC systems). I'm not sure how this affects manifold pressure compensation.

Regards,

Kurt

TheChad · Post 08 Nov 2007, 02:58

I suppose they would be working hard on enhancing there RFC as there are huge gains to be made in that area now!

kimi · Post 08 Nov 2007, 04:22

Thanks so much for all the effort.

welcome to the forum kurt.

HKS · Post 08 Nov 2007, 17:45

If I'm not mistaken Mclaren would be supplying them to all the teams next year?

Carlos · Post 08 Nov 2007, 18:15

Any system that uses a sensor, on a wheel, on a manifold, on an airbox - that relays data to any control system is active and against future F1 rules. However; I think the idea of using manifold pressure as a sensor input for traction control is innovative, clever and probably inexpensive. A sensor, 50cm of wire and 100 lines of code?

THATS not important, not a reason to stop bringing up our ideas and engineering speculations. One day our ideas may be applicable to F1. They may be of use in other racing series and formula. Ciro came very close to the solution to alternate tire gas, thats a good example. Manchild suggested use of airfoils in a formula car nose cone , another interesting idea...I'm sure our inventive members have many more. I've come up with a few, though with little response, not discouraged, maybe they were feverish , crank madness...maybe I'll see them on a racecar one day; who knows who is looking over our shoulder, reading our forum?

There is no reason why every idea has to relate to F1 or the rules...that's what the Off Topic forum is for

One of the great strengths of F1Technical is that is gives us a place to discuss, bluesky our ideas and get some feeback from others. Maybe we might makes some money, get a patent, get noticed and hired on - all possible

persovik · Post 11 Nov 2007, 02:40

Is there a specification of the Microsoft McLaren ECU anywhere?
I would imagine that the FIA has banned any form of Transient Control (limiting the speed of change of revs).
If there is allowance for some TC (transient control), and maybe even adjustable TC (transient control), then you could have a lot of TC (traction control) by exploiting the TC (transient control) to the maximum.

FIA didn't want to rule this form of TC illegal 12 years ago, because they were then convinced that such a move would create problems in terms of protecting the engines and gearboxes. The need for controlling transients in different ways depending on upshift, downshift, gear-number surely still exists and can't possibly be completely ignored, or can it?