KERS Q+A with Toyota's Luca Marmorini

[Wouter Melissen]

Toyota just posted an interesting article on KERS, which the teams can opt to run from 2009 onwards.

How advanced is Toyota's KERS development?
We are working flat-out to develop and improve our KERS system. We have investigated various options and now the challenge is to refine the system before we run it in a car for the first time. At this stage our development has been completely based at the factory, rather than the race track, because 95% of KERS development can be done on the KERS simulation dyno. The 2009 regulations mean the TF109 will be quite different to the TF108 so we see little advantage in testing KERS on the track at this stage.

When will Toyota run KERS in the car for the first time?
We have not set a date for this as it will depend on our development progress in the factory. We will run KERS in the car only when the system has met our stringent requirements for performance and safety.

How important will KERS be in terms of performance?
The FIA has defined the regulations in order to avoid a huge difference between a team having a very good KERS versus a team having a poor one. KERS will not make a massive difference to lap time as the extra power will only be available for around 6.5s per lap, so a time benefit of around 0.1s and 0.3s per lap is realistic, without considering the weight distribution and packaging implications. But an additional benefit KERS could offer is a chance to overtake. On one-lap performance it is questionable whether it will provide an advantage compared to a non-KERS car when you take into account the weight distribution issues but, providing that you have traction, you could have a better chance to overtake.

So would your KERS car be heavier than your non-KERS car?
No, it is expected that our car with KERS would still be at the minimum weight as defined in the rules because at the moment our car is significantly lighter than the 605kg minimum but we comply with the regulations by using ballast. If KERS makes the base weight of the car 25-35kg heavier, then you have less ballast to move around and this could have a performance impact as it limits the opportunities to change weight distribution. However, we do not know exactly what effect this will have as we obviously do not have experience of the TF109 on track, therefore we are pressing ahead with our KERS development.

Is it an option not to use KERS next season?
The 2009 regulations make KERS optional, not compulsory, so it is logical that every team has considered that possibility. However, KERS has the potential to bring an improvement in lap time so we are working at full speed to take advantage of this opportunity. Our development is focused on producing a KERS system which is appropriate for Formula 1 and brings performance increase. We have a group dedicated to this and we trust them to deliver.

Has KERS caused an increase in costs?
Inevitably, a new technology of this kind requires significant resources in order to develop a safe and effective solution. Costs have been particularly significant with KERS because it is a major new technology for Formula 1 and there are a number of potential solutions which had to be looked at.

Is KERS safe?
Hybrid systems in Toyota road cars are proven to be safe and reliable, that is beyond doubt, so the technology is not a problem. We are in the development stage of KERS in Formula 1 and we will not use the system in the car until we are sure that the highest safety standards have been met. Safety is the priority for Toyota.

Does Toyota have an advantage with KERS considering its expertise in hybrid road car technology?
If there is some know-how in a company it has to be an advantage but we do not expect this to provide us with much tangible benefit compared to the other teams as KERS is not directly comparable to what is done on a normal road car. Formula 1 is a unique environment where weight reduction is vitally important. The way Toyota develops a road car is different and the aim is for efficiency in terms of fuel consumption. The ideal version in a road car is more sophisticated than KERS in Formula 1 because it not only means you can downsize your engine, but also takes into account other conditions, it recovers energy from the front and the rear and there is no limitation on the time it is deployed.

Will KERS help Toyota's other hybrid projects in road cars or in racing?
Toyota is a world leader in hybrid technology and we are the market leader in hybrid vehicle sales, with over a million sales of the hybrid Prius, a fact we are very proud of. KERS development will inevitably increase our understanding of hybrid systems but, at this stage, we do not expect it to provide any major breakthroughs for road car development. In terms of racing, Toyota has already won the Tokachi 24-Hour race with a hybrid vehicle which uses more advanced technology than the KERS system in Formula 1.

This is an interesting development and can considerably shift the balance in Formula 1 if one or more of the top teams don't get it right. I believe that Williams are also well under way with developing their system. Does anybody know if they are doing so in collaboration with their engine supplier?

[2ndclasscitizen]

What is the KERS system? That article doesn't really explain it. I'm assuming some sort of electric motor powered from energy reclamation from regenerative braking etc etc?

[Zytek_Fan]

The KERS system is not quite safe at this point.
A BMW mechanic suffered a nasty shock when the car pitted in testing.

[Wouter Melissen]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

What is the KERS system? That article doesn't really explain it. I'm assuming some sort of electric motor powered from energy reclamation from regenerative braking etc etc?

Correct, it is short for Kinetic Energy Recovery System.

[Zytek_Fan]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

What is the KERS system? That article doesn't really explain it. I'm assuming some sort of electric motor powered from energy reclamation from regenerative braking etc etc?

Basically it collects the energy created when braking, stores it, and electric motors dump power to the wheels when accelerating out of a corner.

It worked pretty well for Toyota's KERS test car, their Supra Super GT car that they entered in some 24 hour race...

[mikelzapi3]

Originally Posted by Wouter Melissen

Does anybody know if they are doing so in collaboration with their engine supplier?

I've read an article some months ago that Xtrac has developed a KERS system, not a engine supplier, but seems that not only F1 team are developing those systems

Motor Authority » Xtrac Formula 1 Kinetic Energy Recovery System

[Wouter Melissen]

Originally Posted by mikelzapi3

I've read an article some months ago that Xtrac has developed a KERS system, not a engine supplier, but seems that not only F1 team are developing those systems

Motor Authority » Xtrac Formula 1 Kinetic Energy Recovery System

Yes it is expected to appear on many types of racing cars in the following years. Zytek already raced a hybrid car at Le Mans almost a decade ago and are determined to race a hybrid car before the end of this season. Problem is that electric motors can not be restricted.

[RacingManiac]

Williams' system is unique I think in that it does not use battery but a flywheel to store energy.....I think maybe another team is looking at that option as well, but I don't remember which one...

Its an interesting development for sure the whole KERS deal, but kinda goes against the whole cost cutting thing since I believe this kind of development(and getting something from zero to implimentation in 2 years) are beyond expensive....

[fpv_gtho]

I think Williams are the only team using customer engines that arent working with them on the KERS unit as well. Force India and STR are getting their units complete from Ferrari with the engine, and Red Bull are working together with Renault.

I'm not too fond of KERS to be honest. It does nothing for the privateers and is largely there to appease the mainstream manufacturers involved in F1, as the develpment put into F1 is applicable to their road car hybrid systems making it easier for their board of directors to continually waste money in F1. Right now the only significance i can see with its development is in advancing the development in lithium batteries as opposed to the nickel metal hydride batteries currently used in the Prius etc. The rest of the system, the Prius and such is already ahead of the level of energy reclamation that will be allowed for the foreseeable future.

[Zytek_Fan]

Originally Posted by RacingManiac

Williams' system is unique I think in that it does not use battery but a flywheel to store energy.....I think maybe another team is looking at that option as well, but I don't remember which one...

Its an interesting development for sure the whole KERS deal, but kinda goes against the whole cost cutting thing since I believe this kind of development(and getting something from zero to implimentation in 2 years) are beyond expensive....

If anyone remembers the ill fated Chrysler Patriot LMP, it used a similar system. It had a flywheel spinning at some ridiculous RPM (something like 150,000 RPM+), and could dump power at the driver's will. Of course the fly wheel weighed 50kg and was deemed unsafe to use in case of an accident...

[RacingManiac]

Doesn't that car uses gas turbine as well?

[Zytek_Fan]

Originally Posted by RacingManiac

Doesn't that car uses gas turbine as well?

Yeah it did.

edit: Found the Evo article on it.

Originally Posted by Evo Magazine June 2006

The Chrysler Patriot was the Le Mans car that never was, and keen as they are for innovation, the ACO were lucky. Having rediscovered Le Mans through the Viper, Chrysler looked at prototypes in 1995, with a 'hybrid'. But not a fluffy, tree-hugging hybrid as we know them -- more of a mutant, with some very dodgy genetics.

LNG -- liquefied natural gas -- was stored at -256deg F in 'super insulated' stainless-steel tanks. Heating it returned it to gas that powered two twin-turbo alternators the 'low-speed' one running at 60,000rpm, the other at 100,000rpm. They produced enough power to supply 100 homes -- or a compact water-cooled AC induction motor running at up to 24,000rpm and delivering 500bhp to the rear wheels.
The surplus from the alternators drove a carbon-composite flywheel weighing 61kg and housed in a sealed vacuum chamber. That spun at 58,000rpm and could dump power to the rear wheels as required for maximum acceleration. Between motor and flywheel, the Patriot claimed 750bhp in a car with a target weight of 770kg. The flywheel was said to hold as much kinetic energy as a truck doing 100mph, and one magazine observed 'the energy released during the failure of a 1kWh flywheel is enough to lift a mid-sized car 100 feet into the air'.

After the mK1 was shown as a concept in 1994, Reynard were to build a race version, but the authorities were concerned that if the car crashed and the flywheel got free it wouldn't be very pretty -- and the Patriot was quietly wheeled into retirement.