Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

Author
Discussion

flemke

22,864 posts

236 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
BigBen said:
flemke said:
Dr JonboyG said:
flemke said:
The P1 and LaF (not sure about Porsche) definitely do not have a 30% or any other floor. How do GM or Tesla manage that? There cannot be an infinitely-long-life battery.
The battery management software handles it; the 0% you see in the car on the indicated battery charge is calibrated and the battery isn't actually completely depleted. It's the sort of thing they'd mention in the tech briefing to journalists but probably not in handover to new owners.
I know even less about these things than I know about everything else, which is not much.

Obviously there is no such thing as a battery that will never run out of energy. Can I take it that the difference is that the batteries of which you speak can be recharged from flat? The problem with the P1's and LaF's battery packs, I was told by the factory, is that they cannot be recharged from totally flat and therefore, once completely flat, must be replaced as a whole.
They are the same batteries. What is being said is that in mainstream applications the driver is told that the battery is 'flat' when it in fact has circa 30% charge remaining, this is to extend the life of the cells.

Ben
Thanks for the clarification Ben.

Above I was talking about the problem that the P1's battery pack encounters when it is completely flat, as in, finito.
On the other hand, when the "Charge" gauge is at "0", all it means is that the hybrid supplement is not available.

CanAm

9,114 posts

271 months

Wednesday 25th November 2015
quotequote all
Just playing devil's advocate here as I know bugger all about the worlds of chemistry or electrickery. These batteries cannot be charged when they are completely flat - so how do they get charged when they are first manufactured?

BigBen

11,610 posts

229 months

Wednesday 25th November 2015
quotequote all
CanAm said:
Just playing devil's advocate here as I know bugger all about the worlds of chemistry or electrickery. These batteries cannot be charged when they are completely flat - so how do they get charged when they are first manufactured?
I think that when they are made they are somewhat charged as the default build state. When they are allowed to discharge fully part of the cell degrades and can short across the terminals so it is stuffed.

CanAm

9,114 posts

271 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
At some stage in the manufacturing process there is no charge in the battery. If it can be charged at this stage, then why not later? Why can the cells not be protected against degradation?

Sway

26,070 posts

193 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
CanAm said:
At some stage in the manufacturing process there is no charge in the battery. If it can be charged at this stage, then why not later? Why can the cells not be protected against degradation?
Dredging up knowledge from a long time ago, but that's not quite true.

A battery contains three 'components' - the anode (positive connection), cathode (negative connection) and electrolyte (fluid medium that joins the anode and cathode. These components are manufactured separately, and *just by putting them together*, the battery has charge...

In use, the cathode 'sheds' ions, which have a negative charge. These ions transfer electrical energy. A fully depleted battery effectively has 'burnt up' the solid element - it doesn't exist anymore. A partially depleted battery, when charged, 'grows' the cathode. If there isn't one there at all, then it can't be 'grown'.

Very simplified, and I'm sure in some details wrong, but it's how they work in my head!

mikey k

13,011 posts

215 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Sway said:
CanAm said:
At some stage in the manufacturing process there is no charge in the battery. If it can be charged at this stage, then why not later? Why can the cells not be protected against degradation?
Dredging up knowledge from a long time ago, but that's not quite true.

A battery contains three 'components' - the anode (positive connection), cathode (negative connection) and electrolyte (fluid medium that joins the anode and cathode. These components are manufactured separately, and *just by putting them together*, the battery has charge...

In use, the cathode 'sheds' ions, which have a negative charge. These ions transfer electrical energy. A fully depleted battery effectively has 'burnt up' the solid element - it doesn't exist anymore. A partially depleted battery, when charged, 'grows' the cathode. If there isn't one there at all, then it can't be 'grown'.

Very simplified, and I'm sure in some details wrong, but it's how they work in my head!
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PjyJhe7Q1g

This explains some of the issue with them well

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/everyday-tech...

flemke

22,864 posts

236 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
mikey k said:
Sway said:
CanAm said:
At some stage in the manufacturing process there is no charge in the battery. If it can be charged at this stage, then why not later? Why can the cells not be protected against degradation?
Dredging up knowledge from a long time ago, but that's not quite true.

A battery contains three 'components' - the anode (positive connection), cathode (negative connection) and electrolyte (fluid medium that joins the anode and cathode. These components are manufactured separately, and *just by putting them together*, the battery has charge...

In use, the cathode 'sheds' ions, which have a negative charge. These ions transfer electrical energy. A fully depleted battery effectively has 'burnt up' the solid element - it doesn't exist anymore. A partially depleted battery, when charged, 'grows' the cathode. If there isn't one there at all, then it can't be 'grown'.

Very simplified, and I'm sure in some details wrong, but it's how they work in my head!
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PjyJhe7Q1g

This explains some of the issue with them well

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/everyday-tech...
Including:

linked article said:
If you completely discharge a lithium-ion battery, it is ruined.

flemke

22,864 posts

236 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Sway said:
CanAm said:
At some stage in the manufacturing process there is no charge in the battery. If it can be charged at this stage, then why not later? Why can the cells not be protected against degradation?
Dredging up knowledge from a long time ago, but that's not quite true.

A battery contains three 'components' - the anode (positive connection), cathode (negative connection) and electrolyte (fluid medium that joins the anode and cathode. These components are manufactured separately, and *just by putting them together*, the battery has charge...

In use, the cathode 'sheds' ions, which have a negative charge. These ions transfer electrical energy. A fully depleted battery effectively has 'burnt up' the solid element - it doesn't exist anymore. A partially depleted battery, when charged, 'grows' the cathode. If there isn't one there at all, then it can't be 'grown'.

Very simplified, and I'm sure in some details wrong, but it's how they work in my head!
Doesn't that hurt? headache

ManFromDelmonte

2,742 posts

179 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
mikey k said:
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently
Whilst this is true it still demonstrates a similar paradox whereby a battery can be manufactured without ever being 'flat' but become useless after it has become 'flat'.

br d

8,388 posts

225 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
ManFromDelmonte said:
mikey k said:
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently
Whilst this is true it still demonstrates a similar paradox whereby a battery can be manufactured without ever being 'flat' but become useless after it has become 'flat'.
If we're really drilling down here you can't have a "flat Lithium battery" as at that point it has ceased to be a battery.

mikey k

13,011 posts

215 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
br d said:
ManFromDelmonte said:
mikey k said:
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently
Whilst this is true it still demonstrates a similar paradox whereby a battery can be manufactured without ever being 'flat' but become useless after it has become 'flat'.
If we're really drilling down here you can't have a "flat Lithium battery" as at that point it has ceased to be a battery.
hehe unless of course it always was not very wide and not very tall

br d

8,388 posts

225 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
mikey k said:
br d said:
ManFromDelmonte said:
mikey k said:
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently
Whilst this is true it still demonstrates a similar paradox whereby a battery can be manufactured without ever being 'flat' but become useless after it has become 'flat'.
If we're really drilling down here you can't have a "flat Lithium battery" as at that point it has ceased to be a battery.
hehe unless of course it always was not very wide and not very tall
Oh you mean a "thin Lithium battery"!

mikey k

13,011 posts

215 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
br d said:
mikey k said:
br d said:
ManFromDelmonte said:
mikey k said:
For a lead acid battery yes
The McLaren batteries are Lithium Ion and operate differently
Whilst this is true it still demonstrates a similar paradox whereby a battery can be manufactured without ever being 'flat' but become useless after it has become 'flat'.
If we're really drilling down here you can't have a "flat Lithium battery" as at that point it has ceased to be a battery.
hehe unless of course it always was not very wide and not very tall
Oh you mean a "thin Lithium battery"!
yes or flat wink

CanAm

9,114 posts

271 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
So how about rechargeable batteries which you have to charge up when you buy them? How do they fit into the scheme of things?
BTW a poster on here many years ago reckoned that a lead-acid battery apparently beyond redemption could accept a charge by wiring up a 'good' battery in parallel with it in the charging circuit.

lauda

3,446 posts

206 months

Friday 27th November 2015
quotequote all
Flemke,

Having just finished reading a great article in this month's evo by Richard Meaden on a fully restored F40LM, I was wondering whether you've thought about doing sometime similar for your F1?

I remember that Meaden drove the car for a previous feature and I seem to recall that you've expressed some respect for him as a driver and journalist. I also recall that you had a bit of a falling out with evo over something else. Any chance of putting the past behind you and collaborating with them again?

It would be particularly interesting to see how much quicker the finished car is around the circuit that Meaden timed it around previously.

petop

2,135 posts

165 months

Friday 27th November 2015
quotequote all
lauda said:
Flemke,

Having just finished reading a great article in this month's evo by Richard Meaden on a fully restored F40LM, I was wondering whether you've thought about doing sometime similar for your F1?

I remember that Meaden drove the car for a previous feature and I seem to recall that you've expressed some respect for him as a driver and journalist. I also recall that you had a bit of a falling out with evo over something else. Any chance of putting the past behind you and collaborating with them again?

It would be particularly interesting to see how much quicker the finished car is around the circuit that Meaden timed it around previously.
If this F40LM is the one on Ferrari Chat forum, the guy Traveller documented the full restoration on there. Well worth a read with good pics of the work that went into it. Some people take the body off, new discs and pads, bit of a steam clean, job done. This guy did more, used original drawings to reproduce parts and probably made a better car than Ferrari ever did.

lauda

3,446 posts

206 months

Friday 27th November 2015
quotequote all
petop said:
If this F40LM is the one on Ferrari Chat forum, the guy Traveller documented the full restoration on there. Well worth a read with good pics of the work that went into it. Some people take the body off, new discs and pads, bit of a steam clean, job done. This guy did more, used original drawings to reproduce parts and probably made a better car than Ferrari ever did.
Yep, sounds like the same F40 - pretty much a nut and bolt restoration with full engine rebuild. Thanks for the heads up, I'll definitely take a look at the thread on Ferrari Chat.

Piers_K

234 posts

194 months

Friday 27th November 2015
quotequote all
br d said:
ManFromDelmonte said:
mikey k said:
These blokes said,
Some technical stuff,
about battery life
I find that when the 2 x AA batteries in my portable radio start to drain down rubbing them between my hands to warm them up gives them a new lease of life.

Hope that's of help and furthers your edukshon.


flemke

22,864 posts

236 months

Friday 27th November 2015
quotequote all
lauda said:
Flemke,

Having just finished reading a great article in this month's evo by Richard Meaden on a fully restored F40LM, I was wondering whether you've thought about doing sometime similar for your F1?

I remember that Meaden drove the car for a previous feature and I seem to recall that you've expressed some respect for him as a driver and journalist. I also recall that you had a bit of a falling out with evo over something else. Any chance of putting the past behind you and collaborating with them again?

It would be particularly interesting to see how much quicker the finished car is around the circuit that Meaden timed it around previously.
I have not seen that article, perhaps the issue has not yet gone on sale.

Yes, I have a lot for time for Richard. Yes, the magazine (not he) did something rather thoughtless that bothered me, but that was about 5 years ago.

I can understand why an F40 that had been driven would need restoring. If you have ever had a good look underneath one you will have seen that they are essentially at the level of build quality of a Year 10 DT project. If we're talking about an F40LM that had done some actual racing, it might well have needed a full restoration after every race.

Apart from the GTRs that were raced, and the few road cars that might have been neglected (such as those in Brunei), I don't know what one would "restore" on an F1. If the car has been seen regularly by the factory, anything that for whatever reason needed to be dealt with has been dealt with. There is nothing that is going to rust, little that might corrode out-of-sight. Paul Rosche has said that the engine should last for "at least 250,000 kms" before it might need a rebuild.

My car is probably at one end of the spectrum, having many times been gone over with a fine-tooth comb by the factory. As you may be aware, on my car I have had a new braking system and new wheels made up, had most of the suspension redone, new interior, et al. To many cars, including mine, the factory have fitted more efficient radiators, improved a/c, and better headlamps. This is not to mention a new fuel bladder every 5 years (on the F40 the factory recommend 10 years for exactly the same material), and mileage-lifing of parts such as the half-shaft tri-lobe joints. If there was anything to my knowledge that needed or wanted doing, I have done it already.

Unlike on a 27 year-old Ferrari that began to deteriorate the day it left the production line, I'm not sure on an F1 that had been looked after what one would restore. If anyone has any suggestions, however, I would be eager to hear them. I like the car too much to leave any stone unturned. smile

lauda

3,446 posts

206 months

Friday 27th November 2015
quotequote all
flemke said:
I have not seen that article, perhaps the issue has not yet gone on sale.

Yes, I have a lot for time for Richard. Yes, the magazine (not he) did something rather thoughtless that bothered me, but that was about 5 years ago.

I can understand why an F40 that had been driven would need restoring. If you have ever had a good look underneath one you will have seen that they are essentially at the level of build quality of a Year 10 DT project. If we're talking about an F40LM that had done some actual racing, it might well have needed a full restoration after every race.

Apart from the GTRs that were raced, and the few road cars that might have been neglected (such as those in Brunei), I don't know what one would "restore" on an F1. If the car has been seen regularly by the factory, anything that for whatever reason needed to be dealt with has been dealt with. There is nothing that is going to rust, little that might corrode out-of-sight. Paul Rosche has said that the engine should last for "at least 250,000 kms" before it might need a rebuild.

My car is probably at one end of the spectrum, having many times been gone over with a fine-tooth comb by the factory. As you may be aware, on my car I have had a new braking system and new wheels made up, had most of the suspension redone, new interior, et al. To many cars, including mine, the factory have fitted more efficient radiators, improved a/c, and better headlamps. This is not to mention a new fuel bladder every 5 years (on the F40 the factory recommend 10 years for exactly the same material), and mileage-lifing of parts such as the half-shaft tri-lobe joints. If there was anything to my knowledge that needed or wanted doing, I have done it already.

Unlike on a 27 year-old Ferrari that began to deteriorate the day it left the production line, I'm not sure on an F1 that had been looked after what one would restore. If anyone has any suggestions, however, I would be eager to hear them. I like the car too much to leave any stone unturned. smile
Sorry, I wasn't very clear in my original post. I didn't mean to imply that I thought your F1 required any restoration. More that the format of the article (discussion with the owner on acquiring the car and what work he'd subsequently had done to it, followed by a track test) would work well in the context of your car and the modifications you've made to it.

And, no, I'm not sure the latest edition of evo is in the shops yet. My subs copy only arrived this morning. It's worth picking up a copy though as I found both the F40 article and the new NSX review interesting. Harris described the NSX as a junior 918. Are you tempted by a new one considering your views on the original?