Page 51 of 55 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 542
  1. #501
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    146
    Like
    116
    Liked 96 Times in 52 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 1988senna View Post
    thanks for your details explain
    so from my understanding the each boost power is the same 100 kw no matter what stage .but the each boost time should be decide by the FIA for different stage (like 6 seconds for short stage and
    3 seconds for longer stage unless take the brake earlier ),but I believe each boost time can't be longer than 10 seconds
    I'm glad you ask actually because you are making me think about this. Here's my understanding and if I get it wrong hopefully a pro engineer will correct us.

    My understanding is the power is maximum 100kw, so in purely electric motor mode the throttle pedal may relate 0-100% of 100kw. But when combined with the ICE engine, which has it's own torque curve through revs, you might not necessarily want that linear throttle pedal to electric motor relationship. Then there is surface traction and driving style to think about.

    The teams have three torque demand maps to set before the season starts, but can change these once this season. The ICE has it's own demand map too to consider (it isn't linear). The drivers can choose one of these new electric motor maps before each stage. These are mapping the power output of the electric motor to the throttle pedal position (driver's demand) (and/or maybe the engine output I'm not sure). They may want 100% electric power by half the pedal, or only start from half way, they may choose only 100% motor at 100% pedal and nothing else. The point is there are 3 strategies for the team to play with. Tom Fowler at Toyota said it'll be likely based on surface type. You can wheelspin on gravel if you go full whack early or you could get a grippy launch on dry asphalt. https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/how-t...ost-will-work/

    The FIA will determine only energy limits for on-stage boosts per stage, so it's not time. This might be more than the 1000kj given for the launch boost. I assumed everybody will launch at 100% power earlier and maybe I misunderstood your question, so given the torque maps, they may use half the power for twice as long, who knows.

    If the FIA give a small deployment energy limit, what is the point in the battery capacity other than the 5km of emission free driving. If they give large amounts, then why cancel it at smidgen of brake and force another regen. Likely then, the regen will be smaller than the deployment limit. Difficult to wrap my head around at this point and I'd hoped these limits were made public for us nerds.

  2. #502
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    51
    Like
    24
    Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    There has been comments from drivers about the switch to "stick shift" and the potential to damage the gearbox. As far as I undrstand, they will still be running a sequentiel dogbox, and only got rid of a fairly "simple" hydraulic system to actuate the gearbox. If my understanding of the regulations is correct, how would that be a significant cost saving like the FIA claims and how would one be able to damage the gearbox any more than with a paddle actuated gearbox?

  3. #503
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    146
    Like
    116
    Liked 96 Times in 52 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by becher View Post
    There has been comments from drivers about the switch to "stick shift" and the potential to damage the gearbox. As far as I undrstand, they will still be running a sequentiel dogbox, and only got rid of a fairly "simple" hydraulic system to actuate the gearbox. If my understanding of the regulations is correct, how would that be a significant cost saving like the FIA claims and how would one be able to damage the gearbox any more than with a paddle actuated gearbox?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mbCJecCDr8

    Apparently, removing the active centre diff and paddle shifter allows to remove the hydraulic system which saves money.

  4. Likes: AnttiL (14th January 2022),cali (14th January 2022)
  5. #504
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,114
    Like
    7,478
    Liked 10,562 Times in 4,208 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by becher View Post
    There has been comments from drivers about the switch to "stick shift" and the potential to damage the gearbox. As far as I undrstand, they will still be running a sequentiel dogbox, and only got rid of a fairly "simple" hydraulic system to actuate the gearbox. If my understanding of the regulations is correct, how would that be a significant cost saving like the FIA claims and how would one be able to damage the gearbox any more than with a paddle actuated gearbox?
    Quote Originally Posted by WRCStan View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mbCJecCDr8

    Apparently, removing the active centre diff and paddle shifter allows to remove the hydraulic system which saves money.
    That's true but it also removes the possibility to control the shifting by the ECU. Honestly I have no idea how the WRC gearshift system was designed but I would expect that indirect shifting by the hydraulics can be set that it prevents shifting which would set the revolution speed outside of the safe range. With direct mechanical lever it is not possible. In the end the effect on the reliability may be worse than saving created by not using the hydraulics.

    Damage from improper shifting used to be quite common with the S2000 cars where improper downshifting was really an easy mistake. I recall situations when RPM in the range of 10-11 thousand was achieved by mistake and it often lead to catastrophic damage.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  6. Likes: WRCStan (14th January 2022)
  7. #505
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,114
    Like
    7,478
    Liked 10,562 Times in 4,208 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kubiczech View Post
    Wrcwings says:
    f) the recuperation by braking is limited to 30kW, no matter how hard a driver brakes,


    https://www.wrcwings.tech/2021/09/14...-implications/
    I expected a lot more to be honest. That means that the braking effect will be also really small. For proper racing braking you need values 10x higher or more I guess.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  8. #506
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    44
    Like
    9
    Liked 13 Times in 6 Posts
    Any new brand for 2023?

  9. #507
    Member bandit12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Туркменистан
    Posts
    54
    Like
    11
    Liked 70 Times in 27 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ricardo Filipe Matos View Post
    Any new brand for 2023?
    Dacia

  10. #508
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,114
    Like
    7,478
    Liked 10,562 Times in 4,208 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirek View Post
    I expected a lot more to be honest. That means that the braking effect will be also really small. For proper racing braking you need values 10x higher or more I guess.
    After some discussions on this topic I realized that the total capacity of the battery is what limits the recuperation power to a relativerly low value like this.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  11. Likes: cali (16th January 2022),Tanelv (17th January 2022)
  12. #509
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    146
    Like
    116
    Liked 96 Times in 52 Posts
    Looking at kinetic energy values, 10x appears only really useful at high speeds at realistic efficiencies, stages where you won't be needing the boost so much anyway.

  13. #510
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,114
    Like
    7,478
    Liked 10,562 Times in 4,208 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by WRCStan View Post
    Looking at kinetic energy values, 10x appears only really useful at high speeds at realistic efficiencies, stages where you won't be needing the boost so much anyway.
    I think you undersestimate the deceleration value a lot. Let's say you need to slow down the Rally1 car from 150 km/h to 100 km/h on asphalt (from 42 m/s to 28 m/s). The car has around 1400 kg with the crew. The kinetic energy at the start of braking is 1,235 GJ. The kinetic energy at the end is 0,549 GJ. You need to take away 0,686 GJ of energy. Now the crucial part is how fast you do that. Let's say it happens at an average value of 2G which is for sure possible, I guess it's more in good conditions but on the other hand a reasonable part of the braking energy is taken away by aerodynamic drag and I completely omit that here. If we stick with these values it means that it takes 0,7 seconds to slow down from 150 km/h to 100 km/h. 0,686GJ at 0,7 seconds means 970 kW braking power.

    For sure it's just a very simplified example but I guess it can make an idea about the magnitude of the values.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  14. Likes: AnttiL (17th January 2022),cali (16th January 2022)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •