KERS in F1 - any future?

I hope that KERS will still survive for 2009, just as I hope F1 will survive this recession.

However, perhaps we should encourage our media to spend more time on Sports Saloons and Rallying and Le Mans, as they too - as the article quoted above states - provide good development platforms for the ordinary road going cars.

If the F1 folks can solve the power "acceptance" issue using any type of regenerative braking process; they will have solved one of the greatest challenges in commercial applications.

Also; F1 is the ideal challenge for variable loading on the power process. The demands for power in F1 racing creates a duty cycle of extreme variability.

In the commercial sector, finding a way to average the load on the prime mover while maintaining the ability to process power through a highly variable duty cycle is the other "holy grail" of hybrid technology. In the ideal system the prime mover operates at an averaged output equal to the energy losses due to drag and friction braking. In simple terms the power output of the prime mover would be maintained at the value of average energy expended through one duty cycle; in the case of F1 that duty cycle could be imagined to be one average lap. The "average" power becomes the energy expended in one lap divided by the lap time. In an ideal power process the prime mover produces power at a level just above that value; maintaining peaking power energy requirements used for accelerating or grading in a small storage device. By "averaging" demand on the prime mover the volume and mass dedicated to the prime mover becomes greatly reduced thus offsetting the volume and mass required for the storage device. This fundamental efficiency of hybrid technology does not require regenerative capability in order for it to be used; it just lends itself to the process and further significanlty reduces required average prime mover power.

There are a number of very interesting methods of approach in solving these challenges. One day they will be solved and when they are, the tremendous effect will transcend the race track and translate to positive global environmental and political impact.

Here is a link to a pop science type essay I wrote on "The Three Fundamental Efficiencies of Hybrid Technology." Please try to get by the title line and first sentence. I had some help in screwing that up. The balance of the article will help you gain a clearer understanding of the concepts I have described above.

http://www.bestsyndication.com/Articles/2006/c/carter_mark/031206_hybrid_cars.htm

Also available are papers written or co-authored by me dating back to 1978 that describe basic principles and more recently, the direction we may be headed in hydraulic/flywheel hybrid systems. I am not giving designed solutions; perhaps just pointers in that direction.

Send me an email at mjcarter01@aol.com if you would like to peruse them. They are in PDF and Word Document Writer formats.

Gavilan

I do not agree that we are near dramatic improvements in energy storage/accumulation technology. A fundamental 'breakthrough' in energy density is required. Conventional means such as batteries of various designs,capacitors, flywheels, hydraulic accumulators- have been studied for many decades. Incremental improvements in all of them are being made, but without an order of magnitude improvement, they all have much lower energy density than gasoline or diesel fuel.

A regenerative braking light-weight hybrid seems well suited for many urban/suburban uses--until one includes HVAC and lighting requirements. Those essential requirements quickly overwhelm present energy storage alternatives. Perhaps we can develop low cost superconducting magnetic energy storage for automotive service--but I would not hold my breath. Unless the new Administration supports the development of alternative renewable energy technology, and wins the support of main street America AND wall street, it ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

Keith makes the very valid point that

"I do not agree that we are near dramatic improvements in energy storage/accumulation technology. A fundamental 'breakthrough' in energy density is required. Conventional means such as batteries of various designs,capacitors, flywheels, hydraulic accumulators- have been studied for many decades. Incremental improvements in all of them are being made, but without an order of magnitude improvement, they all have much lower energy density than gasoline or diesel fuel."

The above is a statement I can agree with and still present the advantages of properly designed hybrid processes; one that uses combustion fuels as the prime energy source.

I think that perhaps I have not make clear what I am proposing.

In a system incorporating the three fundamental efficiencies energy storage requirements are really quite small; equal to slightly more than one acceleration to the designed maximum sustained speed in a low performance process to possibly 4 accelerations in a very high performance system. Because of this - "energy density" isn't the issue; power density and life cycle is. No one is suggesting that storage devices must approach any where near those of chemical fuels. In viable hybrid processes, the storage device only serves as a power leveling device with relatively low energy capacitive requirements; with the internal combustion energy supplying the energy to power the process. The advantages are in accelerative performance and duty cycle efficiency.

Gavilan