KERS is giving a huge Advantage at the Starts of Races

[lucky777]

Just came across this very interesting article showing the relative performance so far of all the drivers at the Start Line.

All the Kers equipped cars are gaining a lot of places (except for Kovalinen who can't seem to finish a lap yet!).
Alonso even made up 6 places with a heavy fuel load at Malaysia.
And the driver who has made up most places at the starts of Grand Prix this year is ....... PIQUET!!! Now who would've thought that!

Anyway, here's the article : http://www.pitlanefanatic.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&a...

Edited by lucky777 on Saturday 11th April 13:20

[Road Pest]

With it adding 30kg to the car the commentators were saying that under braking the car is less effective. It seems that there was a lot of gaining a place on the straight and losing it again at corners.

[Scuffers]

Road Pest said:

With it adding 30kg to the car the commentators were saying that under braking the car is less effective. It seems that there was a lot of gaining a place on the straight and losing it again at corners.

that's somewhat miss-leading, yes Kers may well be 30Kg's, but all the cars end up at the same 605Kg's, they just have to remove 30Kg's of ballast.

The issue is that ballast can be placed where you can afford to carry it balance wise, Ker's is a little more fixed than that, so your weight distribution etc will not be as good.

[Scuffers]

lucky777 said:

Just came across this very interesting article showing the relative performance so far of all the drivers at the Start Line.

All the Kers equipped cars are gaining a lot of places (except for Kovalinen who can't seem to finish a lap yet!).
Alonso even made up 6 places with a heavy fuel load at Malaysia.
And the driver who has made up most places at the starts of Grand Prix this year is ....... PIQUET!!! Now who would've thought that!

Anyway, here's the article : http://www.pitlanefanatic.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&a...

not very useful really as they are just going on places gained, which is down to a whole stload of stuff asides Kers.

Yes, a Kers car should be faster off the line (80Bhp is not insignificant).

[EDLT]

It doesn't seem to bother the Brawn cars.

[Road Pest]

Scuffers said:

Road Pest said:

With it adding 30kg to the car the commentators were saying that under braking the car is less effective. It seems that there was a lot of gaining a place on the straight and losing it again at corners.

that's somewhat miss-leading, yes Kers may well be 30Kg's, but all the cars end up at the same 605Kg's, they just have to remove 30Kg's of ballast.

The issue is that ballast can be placed where you can afford to carry it balance wise, Ker's is a little more fixed than that, so your weight distribution etc will not be as good.

Ah got ya.

[Duke of Rothesay]

Scuffers said:

lucky777 said:

Just came across this very interesting article showing the relative performance so far of all the drivers at the Start Line.

All the Kers equipped cars are gaining a lot of places (except for Kovalinen who can't seem to finish a lap yet!).
Alonso even made up 6 places with a heavy fuel load at Malaysia.
And the driver who has made up most places at the starts of Grand Prix this year is ....... PIQUET!!! Now who would've thought that!

Anyway, here's the article : http://www.pitlanefanatic.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&a...

not very useful really as they are just going on places gained, which is down to a whole stload of stuff asides Kers.

Yes, a Kers car should be faster off the line (80Bhp is not insignificant).

I could be very wrong, but I seem to remember reading that KERS only works above 100KPH. Admittedly this is not much for an F1.
Also coming off the grid surely they are traction limited for quite a while, so even if they had 2,000 bhp they would be no faster. The thing that fascinates me about KERS is how to they modulate it when it is charging without it messing up the handling of the car as it brakes on the limit of grip? Also surely a crafty engineer could use the KERS as an ABS and even as a traction control device.

[stephen300o]

Road Pest said:

Scuffers said:

Road Pest said:

With it adding 30kg to the car the commentators were saying that under braking the car is less effective. It seems that there was a lot of gaining a place on the straight and losing it again at corners.

that's somewhat miss-leading, yes Kers may well be 30Kg's, but all the cars end up at the same 605Kg's, they just have to remove 30Kg's of ballast.

The issue is that ballast can be placed where you can afford to carry it balance wise, Ker's is a little more fixed than that, so your weight distribution etc will not be as good.

Ah got ya.

In the commentary I heard the Kers affects the way the brakes behave while being charged, so there is an advantage under braking not have Kers.

[FourWheelDrift]

EDLT said:

It doesn't seem to bother the Brawn cars.

When you are at the front and the nearest KERS car is 3 rows back it wouldn't

[Road Pest]

stephen300o said:

Road Pest said:

Scuffers said:

Road Pest said:

With it adding 30kg to the car the commentators were saying that under braking the car is less effective. It seems that there was a lot of gaining a place on the straight and losing it again at corners.

that's somewhat miss-leading, yes Kers may well be 30Kg's, but all the cars end up at the same 605Kg's, they just have to remove 30Kg's of ballast.

The issue is that ballast can be placed where you can afford to carry it balance wise, Ker's is a little more fixed than that, so your weight distribution etc will not be as good.

Ah got ya.

In the commentary I heard the Kers affects the way the brakes behave while being charged, so there is an advantage under braking not have Kers.

Yep I think scuffers is saying a similar thing with the weight distribution being dictated by the equipment not the balast, it can make the car less stable when manouvering anywhere.

[stephen300o]

Road Pest said:

stephen300o said:

Road Pest said:

Scuffers said:

Road Pest said:

With it adding 30kg to the car the commentators were saying that under braking the car is less effective. It seems that there was a lot of gaining a place on the straight and losing it again at corners.

that's somewhat miss-leading, yes Kers may well be 30Kg's, but all the cars end up at the same 605Kg's, they just have to remove 30Kg's of ballast.

The issue is that ballast can be placed where you can afford to carry it balance wise, Ker's is a little more fixed than that, so your weight distribution etc will not be as good.

Ah got ya.

In the commentary I heard the Kers affects the way the brakes behave while being charged, so there is an advantage under braking not have Kers.

Yep I think scuffers is saying a similar thing with the weight distribution being dictated by the equipment not the balast, it can make the car less stable when manouvering anywhere.

I think I misremembered. Kers effects the engine braking not the brakes on the hubs. The charging during the engine braking phase changes the way the car feels(and perhaps the efficiency of the engine braking). After all consistency and feel are very important to a driver committing himself to a corner. This is seperate from the ballast issue.

[Scuffers]

stephen300o said:

I think I misremembered. Kers effects the engine braking not the brakes on the hubs. The charging during the engine braking phase changes the way the car feels(and perhaps the efficiency of the engine braking). After all consistency and feel are very important to a driver committing himself to a corner. This is seperate from the ballast issue.

not sure all kers are linked in the same way...

the Mclaren system seems to be attached to the nose of the engine, whereas (I believe...) the williams one is on the gearbox.

braking is an issue as you have to somehow account for the increased read braking Kers produces, which is fine if it was consistent, but imagine what happens once the battery is full? to combat this, I am lead to believe they have a 'sink' load to maintain the same braking load even when the battery is full.

[groomi]

The additional engine braking must move the braking balance more rearward than normal which would be less stable than the optimum. I believe the intention was for all four wheels to be generating in the next year or two which should even it up a bit.

[BenElliottRacing]

Scuffers said:

stephen300o said:

I think I misremembered. Kers effects the engine braking not the brakes on the hubs. The charging during the engine braking phase changes the way the car feels(and perhaps the efficiency of the engine braking). After all consistency and feel are very important to a driver committing himself to a corner. This is seperate from the ballast issue.

not sure all kers are linked in the same way...

the Mclaren system seems to be attached to the nose of the engine, whereas (I believe...) the williams one is on the gearbox.

braking is an issue as you have to somehow account for the increased read braking Kers produces, which is fine if it was consistent, but imagine what happens once the battery is full? to combat this, I am lead to believe they have a 'sink' load to maintain the same braking load even when the battery is full.

Must take the drivers some getting used to.

Imagine braking for paddock hill bend and your passenger giving the handbrake a tweak. Not going to be comfortable is it!?!?!?

[Scuffers]

BenElliottRacing said:

Must take the drivers some getting used to.

Imagine braking for paddock hill bend and your passenger giving the handbrake a tweak. Not going to be comfortable is it!?!?!?

true enough although it's more likely to be a problem with it dropping out mid-braking, so you then have less rear brakes and lock the fronts trying to compensate(and miss the next apex).

Lexus hybrids do this, it's a little dis-concerting at first, they will trip out the regenerative braking if:

1) the ABS is triggered
2) the battery reaches full

net result is you have to push the brake pedal a bit harder (the reality is that most of the time the actual brakes do sod all as regenerative braking is usually doing the majority of the work)

[lucky777]

Duke of Rothesay said:

I could be very wrong, but I seem to remember reading that KERS only works above 100KPH. Admittedly this is not much for an F1.
Also coming off the grid surely they are traction limited for quite a while, so even if they had 2,000 bhp they would be no faster. The thing that fascinates me about KERS is how to they modulate it when it is charging without it messing up the handling of the car as it brakes on the limit of grip? Also surely a crafty engineer could use the KERS as an ABS and even as a traction control device.

Another article from the same website: Using KERS to the optimum...
http://www.pitlanefanatic.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&a...

"Remember that KERS is only applied on the rear axle and so by turning energy storage on and off you can change the balance between the front and rear-end braking. For example, as you start braking for the corner you want as much braking as possible, but as you start to turn in you will want a higher ratio of braking at the front to help the turn and so the computer could turn off the energy storage reducing braking at the rear. Then as you get fully into the turn, KERS would come back on again, the balance moves backwards, and helps the front end turn in tightly."