F1technical.net

Hi Horse
I stated that there was no gear action between the input and output of the 'gearbox/ESERU' in top gear.
It depends on the instalation as to how many gears there are in the differential, output crownwheel and pinion and any 'drop' gears on primary output from the engine. The planetary sets do operate in the other gear ratios but there are a fraction of the gears used compared to current boxes. Most of the gears in my ESERU are in fact not turning in engagement for most of the time torque is being transfered.
In F1 in top gear, there would only be an output pinion and a diff crownwheel plus the gears in the diff which are not operating when the car is on a strait.

I am well aware of the skills needed in aerodynamics Horse. They can be compared to any discipline in engineering or science at a time when these disciplines were under general development. Eventualy enough data should be gathered to allow a much easier use of the discipline through computer use.
I am not putting down those working in aero. However I also believe there is a lot of bull--- attached to it in F1 and not nearly enough common sense.

Autogyro, thanks for the explanation, but I think I am too far out of my depth here! I do have a friend that used to work for a gear box company (although these were big big gearboxes) so I might ask him to try and explain it to me a little better next time I see him.

Regarding semantics, or BS as you call it, I agree there is far too much in science in general. It does make for "cliques" where language can make concepts impenetrable for many. On the other hand, you could argue, if you don't know the semantics, maybe you do not have enough background to understand the problem (like my knowledge of gearboxes!). I think there is a happy medium somewhere.

I'm still going to have to disagree with you about CFD though. The more data you collect, the more difficult it is to interpret (just look at some DNS solutions). I don't think you'll ever cut the trained human being out of the equation. That trained person will know that you can only infer so much from computer models before you must test them (this is a particular problem for simulating nuclear detonations, for instance). Admittedly, with steady rules, this need to test becomes less important, but tools are still prone to error. Look how long it took the teams to realise they needed a rolling road in their wind tunnels to get the ground effect right.

Anyway, I'm off on hols for a few days as you guys have puttered out my brain.

Ran across this and it reminded me of Autogyro. Dunno if it's related, similar, dissimilar, better or worse, but I found the concept shown to be absolutely fascinating.

http://www.gizmag.com/steve-durnin-ddri ... red/15088/

That looks pretty interesting. Hope he can make it commercially successful.

Just_a_fan wrote:That looks pretty interesting. Hope he can make it commercially successful.

Uses to much energy to operate, it has to have an EXTRA engine/motor just to change through the ratio range and the concept is ancient.

My ESERU uses zero gears and produces zero torque loss in top gear and only has one support bearing.
In all the other gears, of which there can be any number, my system only uses the gear set engaged, which reduces gear torque loss compared to the latest conventional gearboxes by over 75 percent.
During shifts my ESERU continues to transfer torque through a Constantly Variable gearshift that is truely seamless and not with a disengagement gap as in so called current seamless gearboxes. Do not forget that my ESERU is ALSO an energy harvesting and apply unit AS WELL, with no additional components.
All CVT and TVT transmissions use to much energy to operate and do not give the driver sufficient feel of the torque transfer to allow comfortable driving.
Try one if you do not believe me.
My system is registered for patents and is available for continued development under contract. It should form the main component in a far more effecient next generation KERS in F1. The teams should not miss the opertunity of using a far better system than all current units. It would also be the answer for Ferrari in its future road cars.

You'd help the Ferrari road car division? What about all those puppies they ritualistically sacrifice or whatever?

jon-mullen wrote:You'd help the Ferrari road car division? What about all those puppies they ritualistically sacrifice or whatever?

I still believe that Ferrari should distance itself from the tobacco industry.
That does not mean I do not like the technical ability and pure art that Ferrari represent. I would like to see them prosper in the new technology world.

... and here is a follow up article that puts some interesting caveats to the original article ...

http://www.gizmag.com/d-drive-redux/15120/

I still cannot separate myself from the Williams-Renault CVT, what if it worked?

xpensive wrote:I still cannot separate myself from the Williams-Renault CVT, what if it worked?

It did work but like any other cone type CVT of the Van Doorne concept.
Ask David Coulthard he drove the prototype for Williams not long after I visited Patrick Head for a brief discusion on the bevel epicyclic gearbox I had at the time for F1 'auto or semi automatic use'.
Unfortunately the FIA banned the Williams F1 CVT before it could race and my system, with 8 to 25 stepped ratio potential was not developed.
I did use a 5 ratio version in a 150 bhp mini test car successfuly however.
Patrick Head has continued to champion CVT and TVT technology right up to the flybrid type systems that use toloroidal disks to transfer torque from input to output. Unfortunately these also require energy to hold the disks
(cones in the van doorne system)with sufficient force to maintain frictional drive. Of course the control system for a high reving and high powered F1 application become both heavy and inefficient. This is why Williams only use the storage flywheel part of the original KERS idea they had with induction charging from a seperate electric motor/generator (Porsche GT3 Hybrid).
My ESERU is a complete 7 (or any number) of ratio gearbox as well as an energy recovery and applicaton device. It requires NO other gearing or external components other than an electronic control system and an electrical storage device. As well as being configured as an F1 Kers device, it can also replace almost any road vehicle conventional gearbox in most production vehicles and can even replace the whole powertrain to result in a pure electric drive train.
It has been looked at favourably by a number of F1 teams but needs a large enough development budget to take further. I have received no negative feed back technicaly up to now. Perhaps I will see a version of it in production, stolen as many of my ideas have been over the years.

autogyro wrote:

Just_a_fan wrote:That looks pretty interesting. Hope he can make it commercially successful.

Uses to much energy to operate, it has to have an EXTRA engine/motor just to change through the ratio range and the concept is ancient.

We don't know if it uses 'too much' energy to operate. All we know is that it uses some energy to operate. The designer said that they are going to measure it to prove how efficient it is (or not I suppose - but at least they will know). Having to use external power may not be perfect, but it could be a lot better than what we have now.

Looking at the model, I would guess that it would be far more compact in it's finished form with the centre shafts being much shorter.

Driving a test input through the system but with no load on output is one thing.
If you tried driving a vehicle with a variable output load it would show just how much energy is needed to control the system ratio range and drive the control motor. It would need another CVT and at least one clutch to work at all.

My ESERU just to remind you, in top gear has NO gears rotating or driving throughout the entire unit, which drives 1:1 input to output. No other gearbox has a torque loss of zero for its gear set.

CVT and TVT transmissions have energy loss in their operating systems, this one has the addition of a motor just to give this operation in the first place and through all its ratio range.

build a prototype and get some exposure!

Understood Autogyro - I wasn't comparing it to yours. The guy did say that they would be loading the system to measure the differences.

Mysticf1 wrote:build a prototype and get some exposure!

I have got a top university interested in doing a full feasibility study.
However money is short for everyone at present and they cannot do projects without investment.
Have you got a spare million or so?