F1technical.net

theriusDR3 wrote:will Minardi join Formula E in the future?

Not with a $20m entry bond. No real Minardi and no Stoddart Minardi.

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.
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.

scarbs wrote:https://youtu.be/KsCKrixx5Qk

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"?

mzso wrote:

scarbs wrote:https://youtu.be/KsCKrixx5Qk

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.

Pierce89 wrote:

mzso wrote:

scarbs wrote:https://youtu.be/KsCKrixx5Qk

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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