KERS and ... lightning?

Shouldn't have an effect.... the KERS systems are either mechanical or electrical. Mechanical would be a non-issue. For electrical, you just have a generator charging a storage device... not much different (well, in theory) from a regular alternator/battery setup.

The cars wouldn't be any more 'attractive' to a lightning bolt than any other car, and the electronics should be all set too.

Of course, if a car gets hit..... BIG BOOM

EDIT: I meant if it gets hit by lightning... but it raises another important issue. A mechanical KERS setup has a massive amount of kinetic energy. I wouldn't want a rotating flywheel to come zipping out of the car at 250,000rpm. It could slice through things like butter. Electrical KERS too for that matter... we've seen how a short can cause the bodywork to conduct. The drivers wear gloves which should protect them, but I pity the poor cornerworker who tries to push a crunched car to safety and gets zapped by a damaged KERS system for his trouble!

 

How does this KERS work on next year's F1 cars btw?

I'm thinking in normal hybrids, you convert energy produced during braking and store it in a battery which would then be used by an electric motor. In an F1 car, you only got your 2.4L petrol v8.

I also read somewhere it's going to be used in spurts only so that a team with fairly advanced KERS wouldn't have an overwhelming advantage. Reminds me of that stupid 'boost' button they use in A1GP.

 

Nothing new there then...

May the best engineer's win IMO, IIRC the teams will have carte blanche on the KERS development.

 

The decision by teams on whether or not to race with KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems) next year is so finely poised that it could be swung by how the new slick tyres behave, autosport.com has learned.

Teams are ramping up their efforts on KERS now that the season has finished, with more track testing of the devices due to take place from the first winter test at Barcelona later this month.

But even though the systems should bring a benefit of up to three tenths of a second per lap, the weight disadvantage of fitting KERS is now making it debatable about the real advantage.

The matter is further complicated by the fact that the predicted characteristics of the 2009 slick tyres could mean teams have to have as much of their weight distribution at the front of the car as possible. If that is the case, then there will be a considerable disadvantage from fitting a heavy KERS, which could weigh as much as 60kg, at the rear of the car.

Teams are currently evaluating their options for KERS, with a number of outfits admitting the picture should become much clearer after the first winter testing of slicks.

When asked by autosport.com about how close the call is between racing KERS or not, Honda Racing team principal Ross Brawn said: "It is a close call and a lot of depends on what we find with the tyres when we start to spend more time with them.

"We have all predicted what sort of weight distributions we want and that incorporates KERS in our car. But of course, if the weight distribution has to change, then it is much more difficult to move the major elements of KERS around the car. It depends how well we have predicted what the weight distribution should be.

"If you start making compromises on the weight distribution you may find you lose the potential advantage of KERS. It is roughly speaking 0.25 seconds or 0.3 seconds per lap, and that is very easy to lose if the car is not working properly."

Williams technical director Sam Michael said that his team were keeping an open mind about what to do prior to the first proper slick tests.

"It depends on what the slope is of optimum weight distribution versus laptime," Michael told autosport.com. "You can design your car with any weight distribution, as you just move your wheelbase, or you can change your suspension geometry to get the weight distribution you want with no ballast. It depends to what extent the teams want to go to achieve that.

"Looking at the tyres, there is more front grip available than rear because they have filled the grooves in, so the balance is going to tell you that you need to move the weight forward as there is more front grip available.

"But it is a slick tyre. It works differently to a grooved tyre, and will work differently in different temperatures, so no one knows 100 percent until you get to running it. And it will continually move. There is no such thing as an optimum weight distribution, it can change from one track to another and change very significantly with track temperature

"In terms of KERS, the first challenge is to make it safe and reliable, and the second thing is performance. Once we have those two things together that is when we will take it to a race."

The tendency for the front slick tyres to provide more grip than the rears came after teams vetoed a request from Bridgestone to reduce the size of the front tyres - because of the impact that would have on car aerodynamics and suspension settings.

Bridgestone's director of motorsport tyre development Hirohide Hamashima said: "We proposed to reduce the front tyre size, but the teams refused.

"We therefore changed the rear tyre construction to increase grip, but we cannot find a compromise at the moment. If teams design the car similar to this year then they will struggle with oversteer tendency, so teams which have an understeer tendency to their car will be good in the beginning.

"But the teams will struggle to design the car because with KERS the rear section will be heavier."

Despite the debate over the ultimate benefit to a laptime by running KERS, Brawn thinks there are some tracks where there will be much to gain from racing with one.

"It can be quite a strategic advantage," he said. "There are a number of tracks when the gain at the start could be two or three car lengths between a car with KERS and a car without KERS.

"Some tracks will provide no benefit because they don't have long enough straights before the first corner, but there are a number of tracks where KERS will be very relevant for the start, and could mean two or three car places."

Curtsey of Auto sport.

 

Here's a thought. Use the KERS energy to start cars when they stall on track. If we are adding the weight of the KERS system, then lets add the weight of the starter.

 

I've wondered about adding lineman's gloves to my gear bag... on the other hand with no US and currently no Canadian GP I'm not rushing out to by a pair.

Amen! It'd keep lowly workers off the track dealing with a simple stall and keep cars in the race.

 

There was little blurb in Autoweek about Weber's transmission shifting gears late in the Singapore race because of static electricity from the trolley. Never heard it mentioned since.

 

thats because red bull was bullsh!tting. the tram was located far away from the track, and it wasn't even working when Webber's gearbox let off.

 

This does bring up a few questions other than lightning (which is pretty far fetched, IMHO). I would be more concerned with the dangers of fire or electrical shock after an accident.

First - why exactly would the 60KG of weight ALL have to be in the rear of the car? Rules? I can see the motor/generator, but wouldnt you be able to place the battery pack pretty far forward?

Second - what team has seriously experimented with a flywheel? This just seems so "Popular Mechanics" to me for so many reasons - the inertial effects, the weight, the limited energy storage, the trouble getting it coupled to the drive train without it tearing things up or causing a loss of control...

Third - we discussed it last year when this first came up: Is KERS really just a way to include a starter motor in the car and use some fog and mirrors to claim a "green dividend"? Is 40hp or so really "power to pass" -- in an 800hp car, given the added weight? And what is the fuel savings - 2.55 mpg instead of 2.25 or something like that?

Again I have to question the wisdom of making a major tire rules change during the same year as this experimental system.

But as we all know - the FIA knows what is best for us all.

 

No need for a starter, as the electric motor is already in there. The starting functionality will be in there right from the start (pun intended).

 

So, a random thought - are they going to put a limit on how much "pre-charge" you can have in the battery for the race start? Maybe now we will have not just swerving around to warm the new slicks, but also gratuitous engine revving to get some juice into the Ni-Cads?

I am sorry to be this facetious - but this whole thing just seems so too absurd for words as applied to Formula One.

 

Very interesting question. I guess the batteries will be filled to the brim before the start. It's the easiest solution, you could never control the actual power state of all batteries in all cars, and if everyone has them filled up, everyone's got the same chances.

As to your question if 40hp make the difference: Yes, they do!

 

If they use an electrical KERS system I bet they end up with a super-capacitor as opposed to heavy batteries. I predict most teams will do as little as possible as to comply with the KERS rules and the main focus will still be petroleum power.
Even so; Technically this will a great year. I look forward to seeing what they will come up with.
Just before they scrap it for the year after.
Trying to lower costs and all.

 

The best place to develop this technology is F1 ... the FIA should make it mandatory but otherwise leave the rules alone (for this area), thus crafty and clever teams will deservingly win AND we will win too as they learn how to make this stuff work.

Pete

 

While I agree, I don't think it should be mandatory, as soon as a team get's a clear advantage with it, those without out it will soon jump aboard, and possibly vice versa.

 

Yes you are right, but there needs to be some incentive to go in this direction ... a direction that motorsport is currently not interested in.

Pete

 

I don't think Ferrari are that keen on it..

Luca Montezemolo has revealed that the Ferrari team are deeply concerned about the introduction of the new KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System) for 2009. Though the Scuderia believe they can get the technology right, they are worried that the electronic system is likely to have more personality than Kimi Raikkonen

 

Someone should give Bernie and Max hats with lightening rods affixed "beKERS" that would solve a lot of problems.