Land Jet

No mention of this conspiracy theory during the tv broadcast this past weekend. Either the FIA is wearing earplugs and a sleep mask, or there are no rules being broken in their eyes.

will hung

So I gave this concept some thought over the weekend.

Why would a KERS based device cause the engine to sound like it has traction control if they are separate systems? Electrical motors are silent, whether they are turned on at a constant rate or pulsed, you'd never hear the difference.

The Renault engines have been making that sound for some time. It is legal to cut cylinders to improve fuel consumption in the engines. Those true F1 fans will remember Mercedes making a fuss about it at the start of 2012. Saying that Renault was doing a better job cutting cylinders so that their cars had better race pace due to lighter fuel loads at the starts. Also, teams believe that the Renault cylinder cutting program improves/widens the power curve of the engines, making them easier to drive. And, their cylinder cutting routine is believed to help improve exhaust blown diffusers. By cutting cylinders when drivers first get on the throttle, they can push the throttle wide open earlier, creating more exhaust velocity, creating more downforce out of slow corners.

With no ecu to control the feedback, this proposed KERS system would need to be tuned to the track surface, and then it would need that track surface to stay exactly the same throughout the race weekend. Since the track is always evolving throughout the race weekend, with the track rubbering in and inevitable fluid leaks from the cars, Red Bull would need to do several runs to get the caps/inductors matched correctly. We don't see them making those runs. In practice, they stick to the standard low fuel qualifying simulations and then heavy fuel race simulation format of the other teams and from the outlap of qualifying on, they are in parc ferme conditions. Nor do we see them removing all the car's bodywork to change out these components throughout the race weekend. Even if this system is all enclosed in the rear shock absorbers and would only require a shock absorber swap, the shock absorbers are packaged so deep in the Red Bull chassis' rear bodywork that every camera in the paddock would be tuned in when they start digging in. To be honest, I think it would be easier to tune a Passive DRS system then this proposed KERS system.

Additionally, this "traction control system" really worked well at the start of the Japanese GP. Vettel pulled away from the pack like he had a rocket strapped to the back of his car. I suppose that Grojean and Hamilton have traction control now too. I think this issue is yet another example of the media trying to paint Vettel as unworthy world champion.

924RACR

Um, I fully expect that there's an ECU controlling the KERS unit. Admittedly, I don't know for a fact, I don't work on those systems... but I'd be very shocked (no pun intended) to hear that all those electrons were being gathered, stored, channeled and released without ECU controls.

So adapting to changing conditions is possible and achievable, if sufficient testing time is available. Plus there's a certain amount of adjustability available to the driver (KERS Harvest setting, I think they've called it on the radio? Nifty pseudonym for torque control...) and ultimately the driver can and will be expected to suck it up and deal with it...

will hung

Um, every team in F1 uses the same ECU. Which is how the FIA attempts to keep teams from gaining an unfair advantage. The original article quoted in the first post of this thread is a proposal on how Red Bull could use KERS as a traction control device since they can't use the ECU to control it because that would be too easily discovered.

The scrutineering these cars go through to ensure they aren't cheating is intense. The Saubers were disqualified from the Australian GP in 2011 for the upper wing element being a couple mm's off. There is next to zero chance that Red Bull would be able to hide a secondary ECU to control a traction control system.

KERS harvest setting is just as it sounds. They can only use KERS for so many seconds a lap. They adjust the drag the KERS system uses to charge itself so that it isn't over charging. Why place extra drag on the car if it isn't necessary?

924RACR

That's the engine controller. Does the KERS not have a dedicated controller of its own?

Extra drag would be... equivalent to better traction, if applied in the right place at the right time.

will hung

I understand extra drag is beneficial if applied in the right place at the right time, the regulations specify how much energy you can harvest and use. Everything in a Formula 1 car is over engineered and then detuned to fulfill requirements. The driver has no clue how much their KERS unit is harvesting, so the engineer helps them manage it, like everything else in the car.

According to McLaren's website, the FIA mandated ecu's the provide control everything in the car. In the world feed, when you see the KERS level, when it's being used, when DRS is being used, speed, RPM's; that is all controlled by the ECU.

mgent

I would tend to agree with your suggestion, however, it's much easier to work around cost controls then technical controls! More so for manufacturer teams (Ferrari/Merc/McLaren)...
- How do you allocate windtunnel spend? it's much lower for those that have one on campus...
- How do you differentiate personnel/marketing/engineering/aero/engine/etc between road and race cars?
- Engine costs for those who design/manufacture vs. those who buy?
That is why Red Bull is so strongly against the FIA proposal on a cost cap... they *could* be at a disadvantage against their chief rivals...

My proposal was not meant to sound like spec racing.
- The standard ECU and weight isn't a big deal.....
- For engines, I didn't suggest a standard engine for all, but a peak HP limit and peak Tq limit, which can easily be verified. How that HP is made, where that HP is made, area under the curve, etc would all be free - you could have N/A v10s vs turbo v6s, with vastly different characteristics, including fuel consumption, longevity, drivability, power out of corner vs straightline, etc... This would be best for the engine manufacturers I would believe, for marketing of their road cars...
- For Aero, again, mandata a 'peak' downforce at a specific speed - easy to measure. How / where / when that downforce is created can be variable, and should be driver or automatically adjustable. Not spec by any means, and you would have some very interesting and different designs...

F1 is and should be the pinnacle of auto technology... Limits (cost and tech) are needed for it to survive, but there should not be controls on how to reach those limits.

Land Jet

I wish some billionaire would start an unlimited race series something along the lines of the old CanAm, and stick his fingers in the eyes of all the "green weenies". Driver safety would be the only concern, otherwise the sky is the limit for pushing the envelop. If you couldn't afford to race, you wouldn't be admitted.

2BWise

What if they did the inverse. Instead of using KERS to limit torque (thru harvesting) but using KERS to add it the perfect amount to get max acceleration off the corner. They are allowed to switch between engine maps, and the the driver can easily input the throttle to a degree that will not cause wheel spin. What if they are varying the output of KERS to be in addition to engine torque to bring the tires up to their maximum capability for acceleration. So instead of using KERS harvesting to limit torque, which would be in violation of "compensating for excessive torque by the driver" use KERS activation to bump up the torque output given the driver has demanded less than what would cause wheelspin.

jbossolo

What if they obeyed the rules and used no form of traction control at all? Then we'd see how "good" Vettel really is. I suspect he would not be on the podium nearly that often.

Geoffrey

I suspect you have 4 top tier drivers that on any given day in the same car could be winners (Hamilton, Vettel, Kimi, Alonso). The rest of the field is a) past their prime (Webber), b) not yet experienced (Roman), or c) never will have top tier tallent.

jbossolo

^ Agree. I'd add Rosberg to that list, Button on a good day.
Alonso can drive a dog of a car unto the podium. That to me says it all. I don't even like the guy, but he's without a doubt, the best driver in F1 right now.

Flying Finn

And there lies the problem... F1 practically was that 10 years ago but once the **** hit the fan (economic crisis), it all came to an end. There just aren't enough people with enough money to put it in "no matter what it costs" racing.
F1 is still close though, it's just that there are only 3-4 teams that are spending like sailors (Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull and MB somewhat).

What if that's what they do? What makes you so sure they are cheating? Minardi making noise from grandstand seats? Please.

This whole Red Bull TC is just speculation at its best, nothing more. If there was more to it, other teams would be on it and so far they're doing really nothing.

jbossolo

You have a car that is 2 seconds a lap faster than the next. You (and others) choose to believe it's all due to Vettel. I choose to believe it's only in part due to Vettel. He's got something up his sleeve. Don't be naive.

Greg Phillips

That would be this year's America's Cup catamaran races in San Francisco, and not too many boats were built for that event

Greg