Now Kers is protested

[revrange]

Looks like F1 is doing its best to shoot itself in the foot -

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.p...

[Munter]

I dont have any idea how they are going to police this. I wondered at the time. Particularly the flywheel idea, how do you ensure it's only giving 80bhp not 81bhp and how are the FIA supposed to work it out!

Simple solutions are either a (optional) standard kers along with the standard ecu. Or no power limit .

[Scuffers]

Munter said:

I dont have any idea how they are going to police this. I wondered at the time. Particularly the flywheel idea, how do you ensure it's only giving 80bhp not 81bhp and how are the FIA supposed to work it out!

Simple solutions are either a (optional) standard kers along with the standard ecu. Or no power limit .

Policing this is actually quite simple...

the Std ECU (and associated boxes) controls KERS loggs *everything*, even if the calibration of some of the Kers related sensors was 'skewed', from the other data it would be easy enough to calculate back, the only real question here is who have the FIA got capable of doing this without being challenged?

As a side issue, the ones using battery's you could just calculate the capacity from the manufactures data/testing data, and the flywheel one from it's design/mass/Max speed, thus both being able to come out with a storage capacity.

I wonder who the protesters are? (wink!)

[jon-]

Or, here's a novel idea, just get rid of the pointless waste of money that is kers.

It's a sad day when we're 10 years behind America.

[Adrian Gumball]

April fools day.

[sstw]

Adrian Gumball said:

April fools day.

I think it is an April Fools joke, just a very very poor one

[NathanE]

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

[anonymous-user]

They can work out the rpm being run and gear ratios from the sound, they have done this for years. From that you can work out how much power they have as they know the weight the car is running so can log acceleration, then use a good estimate of aero efficiency to give the power within a few BHP i would expect.

[plg101]

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

[german tony]

If it's an April Fool Pitpass should have admitted that it was after midday - it's still there so perhaps it's genuine. At least as far as they are concerned. Perhaps their source was having them on & they don't want to admit that they were had.

Assuming it's real - who are the offenders?

I'm going to guess at Renault & Red Bull - same engine, same electronics, same KERS, same cheat? Could be.

Ferrari were a lot slower so it may not be them (despite their KERS being the same as Renault's I think). Same for McLaren, too slow despite Hamilton's very lucky 3rd & BMW were also way off the paqce with their KERS car - Heidfeld's.

[stifler]

plg101 said:

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

It isn't the most accurate of methods though. Back in the V10 era Honda turned up at one of the last GPs with the V10s. They used their "sound dynamometer" to measure the other teams power outputs. They claimed BMW were putting out 945bhp. In an Interview with Mario Theissen by Nigel Roebuck later in the year, Theissen claimed that the most he had seen from the BMW unit was 905bhp.

The method can be used as a guide but no more.

(I am well aware that Dyno conditions are carefully controled with regards to ambient temp, air temp, humidity etc and the fact that all dynos are different. But not that different for the same engine.)

[Ponk]

german tony said:

If it's an April Fool Pitpass should have admitted that it was after midday - it's still there so perhaps it's genuine. At least as far as they are concerned. Perhaps their source was having them on & they don't want to admit that they were had.

Assuming it's real - who are the offenders?

I'm going to guess at Renault & Red Bull - same engine, same electronics, same KERS, same cheat? Could be.

Ferrari were a lot slower so it may not be them (despite their KERS being the same as Renault's I think). Same for McLaren, too slow despite Hamilton's very lucky 3rd & BMW were also way off the paqce with their KERS car - Heidfeld's.

Or McMerc and Force India? Do Torro Rosso use the Ferrari system?

[plg101]

stifler said:

plg101 said:

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

It isn't the most accurate of methods though. Back in the V10 era Honda turned up at one of the last GPs with the V10s. They used their "sound dynamometer" to measure the other teams power outputs. They claimed BMW were putting out 945bhp. In an Interview with Mario Theissen by Nigel Roebuck later in the year, Theissen claimed that the most he had seen from the BMW unit was 905bhp.

The method can be used as a guide but no more.

(I am well aware that Dyno conditions are carefully controled with regards to ambient temp, air temp, humidity etc and the fact that all dynos are different. But not that different for the same engine.)

Fair point - I guess I was just highlighting that the concept works in principle, though if not to 100% accuracy.

Will be interesting to see how much of the season is played out on track, and how much by the courts. Was it '95 where Schumacher had the dominant car, and despite a (3 race?) ban, it still came down to the final race....

[stifler]

plg101 said:

stifler said:

plg101 said:

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

It isn't the most accurate of methods though. Back in the V10 era Honda turned up at one of the last GPs with the V10s. They used their "sound dynamometer" to measure the other teams power outputs. They claimed BMW were putting out 945bhp. In an Interview with Mario Theissen by Nigel Roebuck later in the year, Theissen claimed that the most he had seen from the BMW unit was 905bhp.

The method can be used as a guide but no more.

(I am well aware that Dyno conditions are carefully controled with regards to ambient temp, air temp, humidity etc and the fact that all dynos are different. But not that different for the same engine.)

Fair point - I guess I was just highlighting that the concept works in principle, though if not to 100% accuracy.

Will be interesting to see how much of the season is played out on track, and how much by the courts. Was it '95 where Schumacher had the dominant car, and despite a (3 race?) ban, it still came down to the final race....

Yep. I think that season was '94. Schumacher won technically but not morally. A very odd season for many reasons.

[german tony]

Ponk said:

german tony said:

If it's an April Fool Pitpass should have admitted that it was after midday - it's still there so perhaps it's genuine. At least as far as they are concerned. Perhaps their source was having them on & they don't want to admit that they were had.

Assuming it's real - who are the offenders?

I'm going to guess at Renault & Red Bull - same engine, same electronics, same KERS, same cheat? Could be.

Ferrari were a lot slower so it may not be them (despite their KERS being the same as Renault's I think). Same for McLaren, too slow despite Hamilton's very lucky 3rd & BMW were also way off the paqce with their KERS car - Heidfeld's.

Or McMerc and Force India? Do Torro Rosso use the Ferrari system?

If by McMerc you mean McLaren (in which case how about Fiatari & RenaFrenchGovernment?) then you'll see I covered them in my 1st post - ie, that they were to slow despite Hamilton's very fortunate 3rd place.

I don't beleive Torro Rosso were using the KERS system & nor do I beleieve Force India were but as I haven't got a definitive lsit of KERS users in the Oz GP you could be right about McLaren & Force India, for example but their pace would seem to indicate not.

Does anybody have a definitive list?

[stifler]

german tony said:

Ponk said:

german tony said:

If it's an April Fool Pitpass should have admitted that it was after midday - it's still there so perhaps it's genuine. At least as far as they are concerned. Perhaps their source was having them on & they don't want to admit that they were had.

Assuming it's real - who are the offenders?

I'm going to guess at Renault & Red Bull - same engine, same electronics, same KERS, same cheat? Could be.

Ferrari were a lot slower so it may not be them (despite their KERS being the same as Renault's I think). Same for McLaren, too slow despite Hamilton's very lucky 3rd & BMW were also way off the paqce with their KERS car - Heidfeld's.

Or McMerc and Force India? Do Torro Rosso use the Ferrari system?

If by McMerc you mean McLaren (in which case how about Fiatari & RenaFrenchGovernment?) then you'll see I covered them in my 1st post - ie, that they were to slow despite Hamilton's very fortunate 3rd place.

I don't beleive Torro Rosso were using the KERS system & nor do I beleieve Force India were but as I haven't got a definitive lsit of KERS users in the Oz GP you could be right about McLaren & Force India, for example but their pace would seem to indicate not.

Does anybody have a definitive list?

I believe it was:

Both Ferraris.
Massa
Raikkonen
Both Renaults.
Alonso
Piquet
Both Mclarens.
Hamilton
Kovalainen
One BMW.
Heidfeld.

[german tony]

That agrees with my beliefs but Pitpass have just put up http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.p...

It was left up so long to ensure that the Yanks could see it apparently & not for any other reason like having spent waaay too long in the pub at lunch time or anything.

[friederich]

plg101 said:

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

In the quest for maximum (naturally aspirated) power, engine speed is key. In the days before max rpm was limited, getting an estimate of the peak rpm of the competition gave a pretty good benchmark of engine performance. This was the extent of what was learnt from engine recordings - analyse the firing frequency with Doppler correction and you could learn the max engine speed and hence an estimate of the engines potential max horsepower. In the current rpm limited regulation, I don't think you could learn anything about the engine performance from sound recording.

[Munter]

friederich said:

plg101 said:

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

In the quest for maximum (naturally aspirated) power, engine speed is key. In the days before max rpm was limited, getting an estimate of the peak rpm of the competition gave a pretty good benchmark of engine performance. This was the extent of what was learnt from engine recordings - analyse the firing frequency with Doppler correction and you could learn the max engine speed and hence an estimate of the engines potential max horsepower. In the current rpm limited regulation, I don't think you could learn anything about the engine performance from sound recording.

I'd figure you could take 2 recordings of the same engine in the car on full throttle. Then compare how quickly the revs increase between the 2 recordings, and thus workout the increased horsepower. Not sure it'd be massively accurate though.

[friederich]

Munter said:

friederich said:

plg101 said:

NathanE said:

It has to be a very poor April fools joke. The only give away is the bit about "advanced sound monitoring" that the teams supposedly used to determine the BHP of rival engines...

Actually that bit is true.... you can reverse engineer a lot from an upclose recording of the engines....

In the quest for maximum (naturally aspirated) power, engine speed is key. In the days before max rpm was limited, getting an estimate of the peak rpm of the competition gave a pretty good benchmark of engine performance. This was the extent of what was learnt from engine recordings - analyse the firing frequency with Doppler correction and you could learn the max engine speed and hence an estimate of the engines potential max horsepower. In the current rpm limited regulation, I don't think you could learn anything about the engine performance from sound recording.

I'd figure you could take 2 recordings of the same engine in the car on full throttle. Then compare how quickly the revs increase between the 2 recordings, and thus workout the increased horsepower. Not sure it'd be massively accurate though.

You might learn how fast the car accelerates from this method, but nothing definitive about engine power. In the rpm limited era, the engines have close power parity and hence you'd learn more about aero from high speed acceleration rates. Looking at traps speeds would (more simply) give you the same understanding.