Team: Adrian Newey (CTO), Petr Prodromou (CA), Rob Marshall (CD), Christian Horner (TP) Drivers: Sebastian Vettel (1), Mark Webber (2), Sebastian Buemi (reserve) Team name: Infiniti Red Bull Racing
A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Did we regularly see this during the time that TC was allowed? Because I don't remember it, and thus the implication of traction control would not seem very solid.
Activation and "control" of the KERS systems are digital.
The system itself has to be analog in nature.
You incorporate a "voltage over run" circuit, to prevent "over discharging" the batteries. You do the math on determining what the rpm is in 1st or second gear, and you make an *analog* circuit that not only cuts the battery output based on a lack of back-EMF from the motor, but also ramps the energy down/up depending on the impedance coming from the motor. If the tires are slipping, the motor suddenly over runs, the circuit cuts power. You can do this analog with capacitance, and all sorts of pre-21st century ways of getting D/C rectification. The ECU would only know that it's asking the circuit to supply X amount of voltage/time, but the circuit itself could have EM properties the ECU (and the FIA) doesn't have to know about.
The way you design the circuit to oscillate the energy up and down would be optimized for a certain RPM/impedance, and it wouldn't be seen in tire marks - unless an oddball combination of factors happened (car acceleration angle vs. CG). A more squared off acceleration angle might hide the frequency of the ramping, but under the right turning angle/acceleration might reveal itself as a function of the tire diameter/f.
So, the motor itself is the TC "sensor" and it's simple enough to disguise a "voltage over run" circuit to do what I describe - it's basic analog electronics. "KERS ballast". The ECU wouldn't have to know or show the results of it. You could maybe make it driver controllable by disguising it as part of the harvesting function, by allowing the driver to place his foot on the brake?
PhillipM wrote:It makes a sliding rear end easier to catch and easier to hold near the limit, because the tyre begins to slip slightly on as the pulse is applied then stops and the carcass relaxes as the pulse drops off, which helps with feedback and feel to the driver about where the limit is, which may well be a great thing to help preserve the current Pirelli's.
If you had perfect traction and tyres that could take being stressed to 100% every lap, you wouldn't do it, as it's slower, but we know that's far from the case at the moment.
I don't know what you are basing this information on, but in my experience there is no way in hell that pulsing the drive torque is going to help feedback to the driver. Quite the opposite. Additionally it will result in less overall grip for the reasons of tyre relaxation lengths and load sensitivity that I mentioned before. But if you want to continue pushing the belief that oscillating a tyre's torque or load is going to give you any improvement of grip or stability then I'm not going to continue arguing. I suggest reading up a bit on tyre dynamics before making such authoritative but completely hand waving statements.
snip
if it is true or not I have no idea, but it is(was?) the theory in motoGP was that pulsing torque was why the riders had
more control and got better lap times with the big bang engines than the screamer engines
even though the screamers had more power
PhillipM wrote:It makes a sliding rear end easier to catch and easier to hold near the limit, because the tyre begins to slip slightly on as the pulse is applied then stops and the carcass relaxes as the pulse drops off, which helps with feedback and feel to the driver about where the limit is, which may well be a great thing to help preserve the current Pirelli's.
If you had perfect traction and tyres that could take being stressed to 100% every lap, you wouldn't do it, as it's slower, but we know that's far from the case at the moment.
I don't know what you are basing this information on, but in my experience there is no way in hell that pulsing the drive torque is going to help feedback to the driver. Quite the opposite. Additionally it will result in less overall grip for the reasons of tyre relaxation lengths and load sensitivity that I mentioned before. But if you want to continue pushing the belief that oscillating a tyre's torque or load is going to give you any improvement of grip or stability then I'm not going to continue arguing. I suggest reading up a bit on tyre dynamics before making such authoritative but completely hand waving statements.
snip
if it is true or not I have no idea, but it is(was?) the theory in motoGP was that pulsing torque was why the riders had
more control and got better lap times with the big bang engines than the screamer engines
even though the screamers had more power
spiritone wrote:Drag race cars that lose traction do not have alternating tire patches. I have worked with drag races cars and even a pro mod that has tire shake doesn't have alternating tire mark patches.
Red bull has some of the smartest engineers in the paddock and if anyone can come up with a innovative form of tc it would be them. They have been ahead of the game with flexable wings, etc, and so far no one has been able to outsmart them yet.