2014 Formula 1 Hybrid Electric Motors!

[BigOutrunner]

And Formula1 is now slowly being assimilated by the EV world.
Formula E presented a big challenge - i never thought I' be writing about F1 in this forum but...

Check out the videos below of the latest and possibly greatest electric motors money can buy today.
Electric motors sandwiched between hot exhaust turbos and cold compressor turbos,
Which spin at 150,000 rpm reportedly, and yet provide seamless power delivery in any mode!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=96cHD7H1ZEw
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=anLDCVD6v1s
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq7-DJUp3rg

 

[major]

That's 15,000 RPM.

BTW, thanks for the vid links

 

[BigOutrunner]

That's 15,000 RPM.

BTW, thanks for the vid links

That's the speed of the six cylinder gas engine. Not the turbo fans connected to the electric motor H which spins much much faster.

You are very welcome!

 

[major]

That's 15,000 RPM.

That's the speed of the six cylinder gas engine. Not the turbo fans connected to the electric motor H which spins much much faster.

O.K. But I didn't pick up the motor speed from those vids. 150kRPM is incredible.

 

[Dauntless]

Don't get carried away, we don't know what they'll be doing 2-3 years down the road. They vasillated on KERS.

But at least the cars are going to get louder. No worry of people saying the electric motor destroyed F1.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113535

But Formula E is no challenge. Might not go at all, there's only 3 teams so far. Meanwhile F1 isn't just slower than it used to be, it's slower than GP2. The current format is definitely embattled.

 

[BigOutrunner]

That's 15,000 RPM.

That's the speed of the six cylinder gas engine. Not the turbo fans connected to the electric motor H which spins much much faster.

O.K. But I didn't pick up the motor speed from those vids. 150kRPM is incredible.

According to a Shell engineer working with Ferrari the turbos spin a aroung 125,000 rpm in this video:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U-0_Fvlhdpk

Mercedes' electric layout is beating both Ferrari and RedBull. The assumed ceramic bearings in these electric motors are incredible. Perhaps they are using friction free magnetic bearings.

How can it spin that fast and be reliable?!?

 

[drebikes]

That's 15,000 RPM.

BTW, thanks for the vid links

It's not 150k, but close, certainly not 15k. 125K is the limit of the rulebook and afaik everyone is as close as possible

Don't get carried away, we don't know what they'll be doing 2-3 years down the road. They vasillated on KERS.

But at least the cars are going to get louder. No worry of people saying the electric motor destroyed F1.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113535

But Formula E is no challenge. Might not go at all, there's only 3 teams so far. Meanwhile F1 isn't just slower than it used to be, it's slower than GP2. The current format is definitely embattled.

That's trolling F1. If you have some idea about F1 you know this year they have:
*removed front/rear wing and the blown diffuser, thus most of the downforce
*put more conservative (hard) tyre compounds to avoid the PR disaster they had last year

The only race where what you say is even partially true is Barcelona, where Pirelly were even more conservative with the tyres. My 2 cents: go watch the V6s and make up your own mind. I hear these engines every day and there's nothing pedestrian about them, but I could be biased

According to a Shell engineer working with Ferrari the turbos spin a aroung 125,000 rpm in this video:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U-0_Fvlhdpk

Mercedes' electric layout is beating both Ferrari and RedBull. The assumed ceramic bearings in these electric motors are incredible. Perhaps they are using friction free magnetic bearings.

How can it spin that fast and be reliable?!?

Not magnetic due to vibrations and mass of the assembly afaik. There is a suprising number of applications that use relatively common ceramic bearings up to 100kRPM. I think reliability is a function of temperature (firts order), so if they're cooled well enough, bearings can last.

 

[Dauntless]

That's trolling F1. If you have some idea about F1 you know this year they have:
*removed front/rear wing and the blown diffuser, thus most of the downforce
*put more conservative (hard) tyre compounds to avoid the PR disaster they had last year

The only race where what you say is even partially true is Barcelona, where Pirelly were even more conservative with the tyres. My 2 cents: go watch the V6s and make up your own mind. I hear these engines every day and there's nothing pedestrian about them, but I could be biased

Now that you're already proven embarrassingly wrong, another nail in the coffin. Of course you'll claim you can't hear the hammering. It's the COMPLAINTS drowning it out, not the engines.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114462

 

[Hillhater]

. It's the COMPLAINTS drowning it out, not the engines.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114462

Nah !..... That's just Ferrari crying because they have been beaten on technology as well as on the track !

This is the same pathetic reaction as happened when Moto GP started with 4 strokes instead of the ring ding 2 bangers !
I cannot believe that anyone with a feeling for technology development , is not fully behind the way F1 is moving....
.....other than it should be moving faster like the LM cars with hybrid 4 wheel drive etc.

 

[bigmoose]

The turbos likely have "gas" or "lift pad" bearings.

 

[Hillhater]

The " go to". Standard for high speed , high temperature, low friction, bearing applications , has been " Foil" air bearings for many years.
But , 125k rpm is not very fast for a turbo. Many commercial turbo installations will run at more than double that rpm.

 

[BigOutrunner]

Nah !..... That's just Ferrari crying because they have been beaten on technology as well as on the track !

This is the same pathetic reaction as happened when Moto GP started with 4 strokes instead of the ring ding 2 bangers !
I cannot believe that anyone with a feeling for technology development , is not fully behind the way F1 is moving....
.....other than it should be moving faster like the LM cars with hybrid 4 wheel drive etc.

I agree totally with your point regarding Ferrari. Excuses doesn't win races. Proof: their hybrid La Ferrari does not support 'electric only' mode (unlike the McLaren P1 or the Porsche 918) and just uses the batteries to enhance its 12 cylinder engines performance. Its Ferrari in denial about the future, not F1.

Looking forward to an ES racing project with Lebowski FOC controllers running four ES built motors (perhaps having a sub one liter engine currently offered by Ford or Nissan) and beating the crap out of a Tesla Model S.

 

[drebikes]

The " go to". Standard for high speed , high temperature, low friction, bearing applications , has been " Foil" air bearings for many years.
But , 125k rpm is not very fast for a turbo. Many commercial turbo installations will run at more than double that rpm.

I heard from a collegue that consumer focused cars sold nowadays turn the turbo as high as 200kRPM on steel bearings cooled with pressurised engine oil.

The reason why in F1 they limited the speed at 125kRPM aren't clear, but if I were to speculate, in 2014 there was no power electronics that could control a 2 pole pair electric motor higher than 125kRPM. They could have used a 1 pole pair motor, but that would be very heavy (more youke @iso-performance). All teams chose direct-drive between the turbo and MGUH in order to minimise mass. IGBTs (necessary for the 100kW+power levels) don't switch at more than 20kHz on normal cooling (F1 forbids heatpipes) thus with 4kHz fondamental frequency the motor is borderline-incontrollable, so more RPM would have been hard within the existing technology. Since the turbo is slow, for the same pressure one needs a bigger turbo, so blade diameter in F1 is maybe 3-4 times larger than a street car. So in F1 the turbos are big, slow(ish) compared to series cars, but compound with 80-100kW emotors. Seing they're "slow" they can use bearings, but as far as what I've read there are some that chose pressurised air bearings with godd results.

 

[Hillhater]

Many possible reasons for using larger "slow" turbos...
.... including the fact that with the MGU to drive the turbo on command, they dont have to consider using small dia turbos for performance and response at low engine speeds.

 

[liveforphysics]

They are not running slow IGBTs. I heard ~100kHz.

This is not elevator power control, it's F1.

 

[drebikes]

Agreed with high speed IGBTs, but I just couldn't find any that does more than 20kHz, does 100kW and can be watercooled (say 98% efficiency) to keep the Tjmax below 170°C. I'm not saying there aren't any, I joust couldn't find them. Full custom modules could probably go above 20kHz and stay within the other requirements, but F1 needs only a handfull of parts per year. They're high margin expensive parts, but bigshots don't quite bother with such small series.

@Hillhater - wouldn't a smaller turbo spinning faster improve power density asuming it can acheive the same power with similar efficiency?

 

[bigmoose]

The RPM limit is likely to keep the alternator/motor rotor from disintegrating. e.g. magnet retention and such. ... unless it is a homopolar design.

 

[drebikes]

The RPM limit is likely to keep the alternator/motor rotor from disintegrating. e.g. magnet retention and such. ... unless it is a homopolar design.

Could be, though for aircraft motors they use sleeves for 70kRPM+ designs

 

[liveforphysics]

Agreed with high speed IGBTs, but I just couldn't find any that does more than 20kHz, does 100kW and can be watercooled (say 98% efficiency) to keep the Tjmax below 170°C. I'm not saying there aren't any, I joust couldn't find them. Full custom modules could probably go above 20kHz and stay within the other requirements, but F1 needs only a handfull of parts per year. They're high margin expensive parts, but bigshots don't quite bother with such small series.

@Hillhater - wouldn't a smaller turbo spinning faster improve power density asuming it can acheive the same power with similar efficiency?

They don't run large modules. They run paralleled arrays of small IGBTs. For example, the Model S controller does 1800A phase current, and accomplishes it through using a large array of TO247 package devices. IR has a line of IGBT's now for 50kHz to 150kHz switching, and Tesla runs some IR IGBT but I don't remember which one, but I think it was a lower speed device.

Some modern IGBT's are pretty awesome, and very cost-reasonable and still offer 50kHz switching. Personally, I would reduce voltage and use MOSFETs, but I respect others choices to deal with the diode-drop inefficiency of IGBTs.

http://ixapps.ixys.com/DataSheet/DS100450B(IXYK-X140N90C3).pdf

 

[drebikes]

Nice one about Tesla, but afaik the systems don't have anything to do with F1 due to mainly two things: mass and voltage. The voltage in F1 cars isn't clear for all builders but they all use 1.2kV IGBTs, so I'd imagine around 1kV DC bus voltage. This has been chosen in order to minimize mass in the motor and cables as less current pretty much equals less cable section needed and lower losses all over, battery included. In a study some two years back the mass penalty for lower voltage (600V IGBTs) for 120kW on a similar application was something like 4kg, which for Tesla it may make sense, but if in F1 it would be unacceptable. If Tesla has chosen a large array of MOS (I googled the TO247 reference) I'm super curious how they managed the balancing, the driver stage has to be a little work of art as for 1.8kA you need quite a few of them.

 

[Hillhater]

Things may well have changed with the 2014 ERS regs, but when the previous KER,s systems were in use many teams were definitely running 400 volt ( 106s) LiPo packs.
Mercedes were working with A123, and developed cells capable of 40,000W/kg for burst discharge, whilst Ferrari used special Saft cells developed specifically for them.

 

[drebikes]

Yes, this is what I've heard for last year(s), but it seems this year since the energy and power levels were increased quite a lot there is much more energy transiting, so efficiency / mass is more of a concern. Would there be an obvious advantage in using lower voltage?

 

[liveforphysics]

Yes, this is what I've heard for last year(s), but it seems this year since the energy and power levels were increased quite a lot there is much more energy transiting, so efficiency / mass is more of a concern. Would there be an obvious advantage in using lower voltage?

Yes, if you lower the voltage enough, you find a point where external skin-contact electrocutions become difficult.


Lower voltages and leveraging MOSFETs means no diode drop inefficiency associated with IGBTs. The ~1.8v-2.7v diode drop can be greater inefficiency than all the I^2*R losses in an entire MOSFET based motor drive system.

I would imagine for much less weight than all the fancy heavily insulated high-voltage wires and exotic connector weight they could deliver the same power at greater efficiency and reduced cost and higher intrinsic safety going lower voltage and using precisely bent flat aluminum bar for conductors with a little section of braid strap on each end to improve resistance to flexing fatigue.

I don't know how they are choosing to layout the relatively tiny battery pack and motor controller, but I do know, if you design your packaging with keeping power conductor length minimized, it's possible to have only a foot or two of battery cable and a foot or two of motor phase leads. Making those cables heavier through adding cross-section (and you can use Aluminum cable/bar if you're very weight focused) does add some weight. However, you can also remove quite a lot of weight and space in BMS complexity and wiring, and the use of all high-voltage safe connectors that are bulky.

Everything is a trade off. Running a powerful system at 12v would be a pleasure to setup and manage, but it would require comically sized power busing to be efficient. Running a powerful system at 1200v means noodle-sized power cables, but your management complexity, safety/connector/corona-insulation requirements all jumped through the roof.

Somewhere an engineer chooses a balance for what they believe to be the happy middle-ground. In my own humble opinion, more often than not the voltage chosen is foolishly high for no good reason.

 

[drebikes]

Everything is a trade off. Running a powerful system at 12v would be a pleasure to setup and manage, but it would require comically sized power busing to be efficient. Running a powerful system at 1200v means noodle-sized power cables, but your management complexity, safety/connector/corona-insulation requirements all jumped through the roof.

Somewhere an engineer chooses a balance for what they believe to be the happy middle-ground. In my own humble opinion, more often than not the voltage chosen is foolishly high for no good reason.

Agreed the tradeoff isn't obvious and in a way it's a shame there's not a lot of possibility of fine tuning; it's either 600 or 1200V (or 500 & 1000V more likely), but something more continuous would be preferable. About the battery packs, they are all but small - maximum 25kg. Depending on what chemistry is used I guess one can get more or less close to this value. A123 have only LiFePo4s, right? I don't know much about Saft F1 cells

 

[speedmd]

Something went terribly wrong with this Tora Rosa this morning. Most likely a fuel line issue with over 7000 psi direct injection system.