RedBull and traction control

Interesting article on the permitted engine maps with the standard ECU: F1 Framework: F1 Engine Maps

I read another article this weekend, but can't find it now, that suggested that one of the 5 pre-season designated maps for RB is a reduced torque map that allows the throttle opening to generate gas flow to power the diffuser without a lot of torque; and that the map still had too much torque for the pre-Germany rear Pirellis. That article suggested that the map only became really effective with the Germany and on revised rear Pirellis, which could handle the part-throttle torque of that map without overheating the Pirellis - and this map gives the RB the greater part-throttle downforce that is their new 'secret' to getting on the throttle earlier than anyone else mid-corner.

 

The big improvement in speed coming off of the corners is a result of increased GRIP, not necessarily programmed traction control in the sense in which we know it.

Ask yourself how do you get increased grip??? The short answer is more downforce.

How do you get increased downforce??? The short answer is more exhaust mass flow.

The only way to get increased exhaust mass flow is to open the throttle, which according to the observations Vettel is getting on the throttle much much sooner than the other drivers. This increase in mass flow is creating more downforce and therefore more grip and allows faster acceleration off of the corners.

How do you get on the throttle sooner, but not end up in the weeds on corner exit???

You dump some power into the KERS.

You could program the KERS to activate based on brake pedal position and throttle position, and if the driver left foot brakes lightly, he can pull a specific amount of power off into the KERS and this will let the engine make more exhaust flow and provide more downforce. The KERS is only activated on command of the brake pedal and there is no engine mapping involved. Push the brake pedal further and the brakes work normally, push it lightly, and if the throttle is also being depressed, you could modulate the KERS to the point where you can open the throttle all the way and get the maximum downforce and be able to not only increase corner exit speed, but put a lot more power down on corner exit.

And likely it is all legal.

If you want to win you have to think outside the box.

 

All correct, except...

a) You can't program anything. Remember, the ECU is fixed.
b) KERS can only be activated by the button on the steering wheel.

 

If you use the KERS a little in every corner, or in some corners, won't you have less to fight with when you need to?

 

And KERS activation shows up on the screen when they show us all that data that's going on in someone's cockpit. Would it not be well known to everyone when and where the KERS is coming on?

 

Imagine they have a button that moves the brake balance completely to the back and they slightly push the brakes while accelerating. Wouldn't that have the same effect as activating the kers recharging independently?
Anyway what's with cutting four cylinders? It does definitely cut the torque but doesn't it reduce exhaust gases? Or maybe running on four makes the engine run faster and so do the gases?

 

You don't have to use the ECU, the KERS isn't controlled with the ECU.

The KERS activation that is controlled by the steering wheel button is the DELIVERY of power to the drive train. It isn't the ABSORBTION of power, that happens automatically when the KERS control tells it to.

 

Yes, they could use the brakes in the way you are suggesting. Not as easy to control as the KERS, but it could be done.

You want high mass flow, which means wide throttle openings and high rpm. You either need to make less power down there, or absorb the power by some means or you will go off into the weeds.

Another way you could achieve the same effect (increasing mass flow while at the same time severely reducing power) is to crank way back on ignition advance at part throttle. That would cut power and, at the same time keep the mass flow up. Since the burning would occur in the exhaust system the pipes would get hotter and it could eat exhaust valves due to the increased temperature, but if the duration was short it could be done that way too.

Either dumping power into the KERS or chopping ignition advance are two very viable ways to get an increase on mass flow while at the same time keeping too much power from getting to the rear wheels. The rear brakes could be used as you mentioned too, tougher to control, but doable with the budgets these teams have.

Clearly several ways to do it. When it all eventually comes out it will be seen to be clever, and sooner or later they will ban it....

 

Yes you can. You create an ignition map that causes the engine to misfire and thus drop torque, wheel spin stops and you return to proper ignition map.

Yes but you are limiting yourself to thinking about the standard ECU. There is no reason why the cars cannot have other processes that do other things ... but yes the rules, as you have posted, DO stipulate that you cannot change ignition maps except for weather.

Sort of, but I bet there are other processes for God only knows what.

IMO the throttle butterflies should be directly controlled by an accelerator cable/linkage. This would stop the linear torque curve that using electronics enable.
Pete

 

Interesting and probably correct.

Brundle did clearly say though that RB was making their engine misfire out of corners and somehow this was legal . Brundle must by wrong?
Pete

 

What about the Canada tyre mark left by Webber?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxig8iM7jDU]Traction Control ?? - YouTube[/ame]

I recall seeing the same pattern being left by the cars when leaving the pits in Singapore, there was a clear TV shot showing it, but I can't recall if it was during practices, qualy or pre-race.

This is the best video I could find:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfB4UVAgb6o]Red Bull Paddock Club Singapore F1 2013.mp4 - YouTube[/ame]

 

Making a car sputter on turns takes no special equipment.
Mine does it already.

 

Opportunity cost I suppose. If the advantage is higher in a given scenario then pick that one.


If I were RedBull i'd use wheel speed sensors. Have the ability to compare relative wheel velocity. If the value picked up by the sensor exceeds a certain value have the car cut timing or fueling.

 

Now the story that's gaining "traction" is that Red Bull has been able to link their hybrid (KERS) engine to the suspension to create traction control. I don't have any real idea of how that would work, but it sounds like an ingenious way to create an advantage without breaking the rules (since nobody has used KERS to create traction control, it would not be outlawed).

Once again, good on Newey if true...

EDIT: I just read back to the last page and people on this site were already theorizing that KERS could be used for t.c. Either someone on here started the story, or we have some very well educated folks here (okay, I already know that the answer it the latter).

HOWEVER, if you guys were able to figure this out, what in the heck is wrong with Brawn, Ferrari, et al? Clearly, Seb is able to do things out of corners that no other car is, and grip is the big difference.

 

If the traction control is tied into KERS, then that means it wouldn't be on at all times...

 

Not true unfortunately.

If you watch, it always jumps back to 100% at the start of the lap......

Cheers
Ian

 

I've gotta update my shipping address.

Cheers,
Ian

 

When I first read this I thought you had written "half the employment"

 

Watching Seb blow by Lewis up the hill at Spa; a section where Horsepower is KING if there ever was one it dawned on me that RBR is doing something over and above the standard rules.
Lets say it that way.

Its not traction.
Its not downforce.
Its not driver ability.

Its horsepower.

 

Surely the pass was enabled by considerably more speed through the previous corner sequence, thus grip and traction ??
Pete

 

Would they not have to er, reduce the output of the engine at the same time to regain traction, ie. if the driver had his foot hard on the accelerator and the car started wheelspinning, how could adding or removing KERS make any difference, when it is the petrol engine providing too much torque that is causing the wheelspin??
Pete

 

KERS is like a brake on regeneration

 

The KERS acting as a traction control device is actually in the regeneration mode when it is in action. As noted above it's acting like a brake to take power off of the rear wheels. IT isn't putting out power, it's absorbing it, just like it does under braking it is absorbing power as it is when acting as a traction control device.

Some other articles have noted the Red Bull has a large KERS device that may well be a resistor that can absorb a lot of power. Typical KERS systems can recover more energy than they can legally use to augment power already, so if you are using KERS as a traction control system it has to be able to dump the power somewhere and there appears to be such a device in the car to absorb power.

The amount of power absorbed isn't a lot, since if the car is making say 700 hp, and you only want to dump a hundred hp for only 3 seconds, that isn't a lot of wattage.

 

How would linking KERS to the suspension aid in traction/traction control? (this is the basis of the article I read earlier) Is the KERS supposed to somehow "kick in"/brake once the suspension senses wheel slippage? While I put nothing past engineers working on an F1 car, I don't quite follow the logic of this.

RBR having a larger KERS unit would answer the question as to why other teams didn't just adopt this technology if it does exist. It would require the total redesign of their cars (to accommodate the larger KERS unit)

 

The idea is genius if you can get it to work and RedBull have perfected it in the second half of the 2013 season.


The sensors mounted somewhere on the suspension detect the track surface and monitor for changes. These changes include a rough track surface, and likely the changes resulting from acceleration.