KERS - the future of antilag?

[kismetcapitan]

kinetic energy regeneration systems are being used on this year's F1 cars. for 25kg extra weight, a flywheel energy storage unit can supply six seconds of 60kW of electric-assist. Not only is that an 80hp boost, it's from an electric motor, which means instant torque.

it has just occurred to me that such a boost from an instant torque electric motor could also assist in spooling up an engine. Six seconds is plenty to boost an RB26 until the turbos come online.

I guess the most similar effect would come from nitrous (an 80-shot would be about what you'd get from a single fogger programmed to aid in spoolup, give or take some), but a KERS system would, for not that much more weight, never require tank refills.

F1 reports that the 60kW motor weighs only 8kg...? I wonder if that could also serve as the starter motor? (I actually don't know where the starter motor is on an RB26, surprisingly enough!)

thoughts? I definitely plan to, in some distant (or not-so distant?) future, to convert my car to full electric with 100~150kW motors per wheel. Just requires several generations of battery development...

[Sub Boy]

The starter motor sits to the side of the engine and drives straight onto the flywheel.
They probably could be made on in the same....Crap only knows how the whole system works though....

....And only one team in F1 at the last race was using it, Doesn't look like a good future for it!

[kismetcapitan]

the technology is immature, and the nasty electrical shock the BMW Sauber mechanic took didn't help with people's faith in it! Bosch is developing a KERS system that will likely see use in hybrid cars within a couple years.

The system is actually fairly simple. you've got the electric motor, the flywheel storage device, and a battery. Under energy regeneration, power is taken off the drivetrain to spin the flywheel. The flywheel spins in a vacuum suspended on magnetic bearings. Then when you hit a button, power is taken from the flywheel, goes to the battery (or supercapacitor), then runs the electric motor. You could just have the motor and battery, and run the electric motor backwards to charge, but flywheel energy storage has the advantage of a fast "charge" (no chemical reaction to induce as in a battery, you just need to spin up the flywheel to max rpm) and weighs less than an equivalent battery.

F1 rules limit the time to six seconds and the motor's power, but in an aftermarket application the power could be bumped up to 80kW or so. Hybrid technology used in a not-so-green application

[kismetcapitan]

this, btw, has made me wonder why starter motors have been used in double duty as alternators as well? It'd just take some simple electrical switching - discharge on startup, then without disengaging the motor pinion gear, switch to generation. It doesn't necessarily save anything in terms of parasitic loss, but it sure does simplify things by taking one unit out of the accessory belt drives and saves a bit of weight as well. Since it hasn't been done...there must be a good reason why?

[NISFAN]

Perhaps because a starter motor spins the engine at aprox. 200rpm during cranking. Don't expect it will last long at 9000rpm, lol - - - Obviously a differential gearing system would need to be employed.

Years ago, cars used to use a device called a generator, which looked just like a starter motor. However the alternator became the chosen device because it was far superior in terms of output and efficiency.

[mattysupra]

Originally Posted by kismetcapitan

I actually don't know where the starter motor is on an RB26, surprisingly enough!)

...

WHAT? your pulling me 3rd leg ent you?

You of all people dont know where the starter is, i ent being funny mate but i have read alot of your threads and bright ideas and agree with alot of your daft ideas.

However the power steering thing was a bit ,.......

You map your own car too dont you? I recall something about knock problems and reading the knock etc that you seem or 'seemed' to understand etc, and then you admit you dont know where the starter is! PMSL!


I dont belive you own a skyline after reading that mate, post a pic of yourself doing something daft on the front of your car to prove your not pulling my leg! (keep your clothes on please)


Please tell me your pulling my leg! LOL.

[mattysupra]

o and to answer your post. The Kers system weight is more than 20k is it not? That seems very light for the amount of time it costs the cars on a lap when not using it.

I like your theory tho. but i think the weight out ways the power increase does it not? However 80bhp to get the turbos online should do the trick in theory.

You have me thinking tho and as it happens my mate works for Mclaren F1 doing ..... (cant tell you) but i will show him this thread at the weekend when i see him next !

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by mattysupra

o and to answer your post. The Kers system weight is more than 20k is it not? That seems very light for the amount of time it costs the cars on a lap when not using it.

F1 cars using KERS weigh exactly the same as those without. However the non KERS cars use ballast weights to modify the CG, as well as get the car up to the minimum weight, KERS cars don't have as much freedom in that dept.

Think only Toyota use the flywheel system, but I thought it transferred it's kinetic energy directly onto the crank via a clutch. The others, use a pure battery and charger system.

Lewis didn't use KERs at Silverstone, and got out qualified by his team mate who did use it.

[mattysupra]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

F1 cars using KERS weigh exactly the same as those without. However the non KERS cars use ballast weights to modify the CG, as well as get the car up to the minimum weight, KERS cars don't have as much freedom in that dept.

Think only Toyota use the flywheel system, but I thought it transferred it's kinetic energy directly onto the crank via a clutch. The others, use a pure battery and charger system.

Lewis didn't use KERs at Silverstone, and got out qualified by his team mate who did use it.

i was under the impression that the cars was lugging more weight when running KERS? so its down to ballast in other cars and them being able to move the ballast to where they wont then? Surely the kers cars could move something else to ballast out then?

O and what the hell has happened to lewis? How can they get the car so wrong when it worked so well last year? I know at silverstone he got mugged of a good time at the qualifing but he admited himself that he could not go any faster with that car. So if no KERS, whats going on?

[NISFAN]

Well McLaren don't have a weight issue, atleast.

I know some of the heavier drivers don't use KERs (Kubica???) because the car is close to the limit, and would actually weigh more if KERS was fitted, so would be a severe disadvantage.

Yes tell me about Lewis, McLaren has gone from one of the best to absolutely the worst car out there. Even Force India's are faster, lol, and we know it is not the engine. Lewis wanted to try the car without KERS to see if he could set it up better. Also didn't use it in Monaco, but that track is not KERS friendly anyway.

[bigmikespec]

Something that is related to what you mentioned (KERS) is what some turbocharger manufacturers are looking at and that is driving the turbocharger shaft via electric motor to increase spool from low throttle...

Browser Warning

Sorry, it has been mentioned before?

[kismetcapitan]

Originally Posted by mattysupra

WHAT? your pulling me 3rd leg ent you?

You of all people dont know where the starter is, i ent being funny mate but i have read alot of your threads and bright ideas and agree with alot of your daft ideas.

However the power steering thing was a bit ,.......

You map your own car too dont you? I recall something about knock problems and reading the knock etc that you seem or 'seemed' to understand etc, and then you admit you dont know where the starter is! PMSL!


I dont belive you own a skyline after reading that mate, post a pic of yourself doing something daft on the front of your car to prove your not pulling my leg! (keep your clothes on please)


Please tell me your pulling my leg! LOL.

the fact is, I never thought about the starter motor, never bothered to look for it on the car, and never realized that I had been ignoring it until just recently! It's obviously near the flywheel, I'll go have a look just so that I can fill this glaring hole in my knowledge base...I've been hands-on through four rebuilds, have self-installed a lot of ancillary systems, do my own mapping...but yep, have never seen the starter motor on the engine! (I probably have seen it, but just didn't process the information as I was likely looking at something else)

[NISFAN]

Never mind looking at the starter motor, try removing it and re-fitting.

You can't claim to have worked on Skylines without losing 2 pints of blood, 25cm^2 of skin and fracturing atleast 4 bones in your arms and hands whilst trying to contort your body, and then your arm into the right position to get at the thing.

P'ah, four re-builds

[Pete G]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Perhaps because a starter motor spins the engine at aprox. 200rpm during cranking. Don't expect it will last long at 9000rpm, lol - - - Obviously a differential gearing system would need to be employed.

Years ago, cars used to use a device called a generator, which looked just like a starter motor. However the alternator became the chosen device because it was far superior in terms of output and efficiency.

It's only turning slowly because it is designed for low speed high torque to crank the engine using battery power,- the bearings could be replaced with high speed ones I would think?.
The other point is that it is a DC motor like the dynamo (generator) in my old car which are basically the same thing,- spin them and they produce electric power, apply electric power and they spin. Alternators produce AC which has to be rectified to DC to keep the battery charged and run everything.

[kismetcapitan]

current hybrids use the electric motor as a starter motor, so they've clearly sorted out whatever issue they were having.

Why (there must be a good reason) would an alternator produce AC which has to be converted to DC, when a dynamo could just produce DC from the start? Maybe for voltage regulation? (an alternator without a regulator would produce too much juice at high RPM - it makes peak power usually around 3000rpm, that much I know)