Associate
- Joined
- 18 May 2007
- Posts
- 851
- Location
- Swansea
If minimum engine weight was inclusive of KERS we'd see a lot more teams using it.
***Official 2010 F1 thread***
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
i wouldn't go that far.
Higher BHP.
Better Drive-ability.
Lighter.
cooler.
better packaging.
only negatives was having to adapt the gearbox to fit, and the gearbox being overtorqued too many times. Brawn and JB wouldnt have won any championships with the Honda Engine.
yeah, wrecked the car! lol
I think it was more the fact that they had to chop great chunks out of the car to make the engine fit, Overlag. And the crank height was different compared to the Honda, so that altered the packaging as well. Yes, ultimately the Merc engine was a far better unit than the Honda. But the car was designed to take a Honda.
Had in-season testing been an option, I'm sure we'd have seen a B-Spec BGP001 with a rear end actually designed for the Merc engine rather than a (remarkably well executed) lash-up.
It's not just a case of left and right though, it's front and rear too. No good having perfect lateral balance if all the weight is sat too far forward / backward
Not having KERS means if you can place small amounts of ballast here there and everywhere to have the overall centre of balance exactly where you want.
With KERS you lose a lot of that as it needs to be more of a big lump in one spot.
Im sorry if Im sounding like a dog with a bone Im just trying to understand something here (the electrical engineer in me I guess lol)
All F1 cars that just have the chassis , wheels, engine and gearbox are designed significantly underweight so they can add the ballast in whatever areas for different tracks etc etc
The Honda / Brawn would have been designed originally without KERS and so I can appreciate why they didnt use it last year (even if Merc would have given it to them for free which I doubt) - one of the many hassles they didnt need
I would also suspect that generally the rear of the car is generally significantly heavier than the front , but completely guessing I would say around 60% towards the rear (on race day this is)
Due to the fuel cell having to be made a good 50% larger next year (maybe a bit less if the Merc engine has to be detuned for equalisation purposes and therefore gets better economy but I think we would expect all tanks to be double the size if not more of what they were in 09), the tank itself probably weighs nothing (arent they some kind of collapsable balloon?) but the added weight of the fuel is usually all on one side (I dont believe the cell is on both sides is it?) surely this added weight on one side - although depleting through the race can be counter wighted with the KERS unit / KERS ballast intrinsic to the 10 car?
Because all cars are desgned severely underweight it wouldnt make as much difference to the balance of the 10 car as it would have for 09 imo
I would also suggest that likes of Brawn (and maybe Red Bull if they can source a KERS unit from somewhere, as Renault's didnt really seem to be that good) HAVE to design the OPTION of using it into 10 cars just incase likes of McLaren or Ferrari break the agreement (I wouldnt be surprised if someone breaks it during the season, but maybe not during the frst few flyaway races)
a lot of commentary time was taken up in 09 regarding the "extra weight" of KERS being a disadvantage - which I dont totally agree with. Yes I fully appreciate the few areas it can go will alter the balance, no question, but at the end of the day minus fuel (ie at the end of the race) all cars have to weigh a minimum amount - which is why all teams ask drivers to pick up rubber at the end to make up 3 or 4kg. Its Not like the McLaren had to weigh the same as the Brawn, and then they had to add the weight of KERS on top
Also surely the additional fuel required to be carried will put a big spanner in the works for most teams in the respect that they cant just do long wheel based version of the 09 cars to allow for the bigger fuel cell, it will have to alter aero and other areas also surely?
PS regarding double diffuser I was only making a general comment earlier, any invention for one team is much easier banable by the FIA , if it appears on multiple teams I think they would have a harder time not legalising it. I fully appreciate KERS is un-bannable
Sorry if this is boring to some, just trying to understand more technical aspects which I find intrigueing
Loads of stats for 2009 season - http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/11/15/f1-2009-the-year-in-stats-part-1/
what i don't understand is you seem to think that Kers is on one side of the car, and the fuel tank is on another side etc.
The fuel tank is right behind the driver, and does weight quiet a lot even when empty. KER's batteries were under the fuel tank for most cars, which raised the COG slightly. However they still stuck them right in the middle as well. The motor itself is probably on one side of the car but is counter weighted by cars normally having a bigger radiator on one side of the car.
Why is it a weight issue?
well lets "make up" an example. (just to prove the point)
Car 510kg
KER's 30kg
Driver 1 65kg
Driver 2 75kg.
Non Kers
Driver 1: 575kg. 30kg Ballast.
Driver 2: 585kg. 20kg Ballast.
Kers
Driver 1: 605kg. No ballast.
Driver 2: 615kg. 10kg overweight. (IE the heavier driver doesnt run with Kers like Kubica)
Now since weight distro is so important, as they normally stick a lot of weight in the front wing to try and get closer to 45/55 can you see why they keep saying its a disadvantage? 30kg is 30kg, no matter what way you try and put it. You say they just have to design the car lighter. But if they save 30kg, then having 60kg of ballast is better than 30kg etc. Plus like i said, the Batteries have to go as close to the COG as possible, same as the fuel cell, this means the fuel cell ends up higher, raising the COG as well. Basically a car with KERS has a higher COG, and a COG out of position due to less ballast. Its less than ideal.
Kers was too restricted to make it much use, other than defending a position in a slower car. It needs more power+time to make use of that weight.
Tilke-drone Indian circuit revealed (first race in 2011) - http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/11/15/2011-indian-f1-track-design/
Haven't even looked at it yet, but - long straight with a hairpin at the end, couple of long constant radius curves and a fairly weird little complex that doesn't belong?
It has every single one of the Tilke hallmarks.
Right, no need to look at it then.
Other half just asked - "If this Tonka bloke is designing all the tracks now, why not just design one and race there every 2 weeks rather that carrying all the team stuff all over the world?"
I couldn't come up with a decent answer except - Bernie wants money.
It's a company with a lot of designers though who has most control over the main aspects of track design (ie. circuit layout rather than materials and amenities etc.) is unclear really, most likely it's at the very least heavily overseen by Tilke himself.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 4,025
- Location
- Woking, Surrey
Freds off to a good start at Ferrari then...
Luca managed to drop both his drivers in it
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/11/...l-trap-in-first-appearance-for-team-pictures/
Luca managed to drop both his drivers in it
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/11/...l-trap-in-first-appearance-for-team-pictures/
That was very funny.
They went down the straight waving as if they had were on a parade having already won the championship. They then bizarrely turn off the road and into a sand trap at slow speed and then gradually grind to a halt as the wheels of the car sink into the sand.
The 2 drivers then get out of the car, looking rather foolish, but stop short of pushing the car out of the sand trap.
Well, now that Alonso has arrived, Ferrari really have no excuses. If they don't start winning soon, most people will start believing that Ferrari are now on a downward spiral (after the loss of MS and Brawn) and will go back to the days when winning 2-3 races per year was seen as a good season.
They went down the straight waving as if they had were on a parade having already won the championship. They then bizarrely turn off the road and into a sand trap at slow speed and then gradually grind to a halt as the wheels of the car sink into the sand.
The 2 drivers then get out of the car, looking rather foolish, but stop short of pushing the car out of the sand trap.
Well, now that Alonso has arrived, Ferrari really have no excuses. If they don't start winning soon, most people will start believing that Ferrari are now on a downward spiral (after the loss of MS and Brawn) and will go back to the days when winning 2-3 races per year was seen as a good season.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 4,025
- Location
- Woking, Surrey
McLarens KERs batteries were on one side of the car - the side with the extra intake on the sidepod and the larger exhaust exit. This is another limitation of KERs - the need to cool the thing.
Ferrari had their batteries forward of the driver cell, along the centre line to try to move the weight as far forward as possible. This is why Kimi had smoke pouring out of his cockpit when it all went a bit wrong - Malaysia I believe.
To round things up, yes the fuel cell is centred in the car between the driver and the engine.
Just to add a bit of "weight" to the issue
Its all very well saying make the car a bit lighter but, its bloody difficult when a complete RWEP [for example] weighs less than 3KG.
IF you are allowed to (please just say if you arent)
How much ballast did the Red Bull's use on average?
I have to admit I didnt realise the KERS was so heavy - I was thinking it would be more like 5 - 10KG rather than 30 or so
Thanks Overlag much appreciated, I was assuming engine and gearbox was fully behind the driver and therefore the fuel cell would have to be one side or the other, maybe I imagnined it but I could have sworn I read somewhere in autosport or on one of the main sites about collapsable fuel cells
Would disagree with that though - very useful in qualifying (as you can use the KERS before the start of the quali lap and during it), it was also pretty helpful off the line in the race (on certain circuits admittedly) and really useful in races getting past equally fast cars (in most cases seemingly better than a good drag)
Thank you
Last edited: