FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[1Lemon]

Oh are poor merc upset that their engine isn't as advanced as Renaults? N'awwww

Very much so.

I bet Williams also wish they had a renault.... oh, hang on...

Next year. Merc: Must try harder.

Look at all the cars running this year with Merc engines aren't exactly doing fantastic, sure they've won a smattering of races but their fancy engine mapping isn't up to standards, so get on it!

[What's Burning?]

I mean people are talking as if there's some sort of traction control being used. And here when I was coming around to the it's just Vettel's greatness camp.

[1Lemon]

I mean people are talking as if there's some sort of traction control being used. And here when I was coming around to the it's just Vettel's greatness camp.

Fancy aero and engine stuff is all, nothing illegial just fancy.

[CookinFlat6]

Nice little theory, a step up from 'it's all Seb' but just a couple of flaws

First there is an engine freeze, then there is a restriction on exhaust blowing as well as an outlawing of aggressive maps

Yet a team have a specific device that gives a 2 sec advantage, just like that? And we know it's specific because it wasn't on Webbers car in Singers

Yeah whatever

[Jabberwocky]

Apart from forums patrolled by slim shady

Obscure but amusing. Would the real slim shady please stand up


Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

[CookinFlat6]

seems this is the real slim shady we come across nowadays

[youtube]a-KFCk6tvuE[/youtube]

[racechick]

Please stand up, please stand up.

[scotty]

I find this debate quite interesting actually because the line between anything that improves traction and outright traction control is really blurry in pure terms of the letter of the law. In other words - you can improve traction in setup - is that a form of traction control? You could, in the right way, argue that some weird form of traction 'control' system is actually merely a setup improvement that gives the car better traction, much like a differential setting or suspension setup. Going into it that way, it is easy to see just how blurred the lines in the F1 rulebook actually are despite the efforts of the powers that be. And next season and beyond? Things like this will have far more effect when the electronic systems become ridiculously complex...

[CookinFlat6]

You make some good points, and it is interesting.

Traction control isnt a question of setup (though the word implies so) because the traction control in question really should be called 'on demand traction control' or 'when of benefit traction control'
So the biggest demarcation line is 'does something happen on the car if and when more traction is required?' or does something happen all the time, or does something happen to improve traction that has no other effect or function elsewhere.

So most definitely, something happening on demand because the wheels are slipping is not allowed
Next, something happening on demand that does something else but also limits slip, this should clearly be illegal.
Then, one could argue that the drivers right foot modulation is traction control, but thats clearly not feasible especially when one realises the throttle pedal is fly by wire. So what about using the right foot to trigger electronic TC? that would be seen in the SECU and clearly illegal

So assuming I havent gone up a dead end so far, we are left with something that improves traction but is not on demand, not when slip is detected, not when the driver triggers it and not controlled by the SECU. So we are back to setup, something that improves traction set in parc ferme

the problem there is how to improve traction (in the form of torque modulation not aero or suspension) and not lose power by having it on all the time?

So we need a system that modulates torque only in slow or bumpy corners, or only when the car initially tries to lay the power through the tyres on acceleration in the low rev band. The sytem cannot be active at any other time. So the system must be on sometimes but not on demand, not reacting to slip sensors and definetely ostensibly part of some other function.

The system must somehow modulate torque at certain times so will have to be produced with the engine manufacturers involvement.

When we realise Renault are the engine maker allowed to modify their engine after the freeze to 'catch up' and were allowed to bring 'interesting engine mapping and other special algos, some of which where rejected for being too obviously way beyond what was needed to catch up on engine power then it makes sense to look at how they different their Kers is from others, alternators, fires, etc, etc

So it looks like something going on with the engine mapping, kers harvesting, obviously harvesting much much more than the others although they are all only allowed to store and use the same amount.

So whats all their extra kers harvesting for? they cant store any more why recover energy you dont use, why strain your alternators etc, why overwork the system.

So IMO they are using kers harvesting not just under braking but also when accelerating, they then stop and start the harvesting in pulses leading to torque modulation and over working of their alternators and other stuff.

And I rekon they have had this for a long time, and have sandbagged like mad. Seb always seems to be able to pull out a certain gap no matter whos behind etc. And they been doing it for years, and they have even let the customer teams have a watered down version, I remember the mad starts Lotus had a couple of years ago, Petrov jumping many places at the start etc

Its just that recently Seb has gotten a little bit carried away in his hunt for ze stats and has let the cat out the bag with his antics in Singapore

yup red Bull Renault have had this magic button for years and their genius was in distracting everyobne away from it with various 'dummies' like the flexiwings and other tricks that they happily gave up after a bit of messing around

maybe all that time they had this 'nitro' style advantage and had to use it sparingly because of its problems and tested in on Webber and their customer teams.

Its only recently that I think back to say 2010, Webber outqualifies and beats Seb regularly and now all of a sudden Seb is the master qualifier who is unbeatable? This is a guy beaten by Di resta in the same car and Di Resta is not know to be the fastest guy on the grid.

Civilised responses most welcome from all!

[stonemonkey]

Wouldn't it be defined as a system that modulates the torque to the drive wheels independently of driver input?

[CookinFlat6]

Simply - kers harvesting not under braking would modulate torque

From the OP;

It is theoretically easy to modulate the output torque and charging input torque to an electric motor/generator using capacitors, batteries, inductors and a feedback signal. Torque changes are instant and control is easy and legal.

[racechick]

Maybe when those messages go out to Seb saying, save the tyres, or take care of the engine, or make sure you bring this car home, or don't do silly things etc etc , maybe what they all really mean is ...don't go so mad on that Traction button or everyone will guess........ And he went and did it!!! I bet Horner was going

[CookinFlat6]

agreed RC

If there was one driver you could count on to get carried away and 'show off'

ladies and gentlemen, Mr finger

[Jabberwocky]

When you also think about how much power on over steer Seb was getting in Singapore. Strangely his KERS was no working its best

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

[What's Burning?]

When you also think about how much power on over steer Seb was getting in Singapore. Strangely his KERS was no working its best

And Webber got pole.