Red Bull’s traction secret revealed?

[stefa]

It is easier to make peace with fact that RB are better in R&D, than to make conspiracy theories...

[Senna4Ever]

It is easier to make peace with fact that RB are better in R&D, than to make conspiracy theories...

in the end: 100% agree with you ...

[Rob]

heres a quote from a Q&A on http://www.formula1.com/news/intervi.../10/15032.html. Is he joking or telling the truth?....

Q: Sebastian, there was a lot of hype about the Red Bull ‘traction control’ in Singapore. Can you explain the state of affairs?
Sebastian Vettel: Well, of course, as everybody witnessed it worked in Singapore. We’d been working on it all Friday and Saturday, and yes, on Sunday it worked perfectly for the first time - when it mattered. I am sure for the races to come that we will be able to enhance the system even further - to profit even more.

[Hermann]

heres a quote from a Q&A on http://www.formula1.com/news/intervi.../10/15032.html. Is he joking or telling the truth?....

Telling the truth and masking it as a joke.

[demon2424]

Well, it is clear by the FIA that Red Bull car is legal. After that there should be no issues. Ferrari and Mercedes are gonna follow that, not interested about Mercedes though, but still, hope it helps for Ferrari.

[Alonsomaniac]

When people are talking about TC, they are thinking of and referring to the classic built in TC system which is illegal.
RB are not using that because it would be discovered immediately.
But now it seems they have found a way to use a legal system , KERS, to function effectively as a form of tractioncontrol. Very clever, and as long as you don't know what you are looking for, you will not find it.
Now, is this legal?
That depends on what the rule says: if the rule says a TC system is not allowed, then it is perfectly legal because indeed no TC system is present. They use another system to function like one.
But if the rule says that ANY FORM of TC is forbidden, then the car is illegal.

Simple as that.

[flam147]

When people are talking about TC, they are thinking of and referring to the classic built in TC system which is illegal.
RB are not using that because it would be discovered immediately.
But now it seems they have found a way to use a legal system , KERS, to function effectively as a form of tractioncontrol. Very clever, and as long as you don't know what you are looking for, you will not find it.
Now, is this legal?
That depends on what the rule says: if the rule says a TC system is not allowed, then it is perfectly legal because indeed no TC system is present. They use another system to function like one.
But if the rule says that ANY FORM of TC is forbidden, then the car is illegal.

Simple as that.

i would agree with that

[gjoko-mkd]

from f1technical by n smikle

My very reliable sources tell me that Redbull have a special lining of ultra high density solid fuel coated inside the exhaust pipes. It it aslo rumoured that RedBull also have higher than normal levels of hydrogen carriers in their fuel.

Sebastian Vettels sets his engine to "G-9", this is a special engine map that allows semi-lean engine cycling and post inginition to create very high exhaust gas temperatures. The solid fuel coating on inner surface of the exhaust pipes activates and evaporates. The fuel reacts with the excess air in the exhaust gas stream. Though burning at a moderate rate, the explosion from the solid fuel air mixture is still expansive enough to increase the energy of the exhaust gasses three-fold.

The fuel is only enough to be used for a few minutes. But with low speed corners, where exhaust blowing is required most, only a small portion of the lap, a few minutes of off throttle is more than enough for Vettel to blast out of corners with a 40 point down-force advantage.

It is said that the number 1 RB-9 car has exhaust pipes that are 5 kilograms heavier than normal. That is how unbelievable dense this slow burning rocket fuel is! Some fuel and balast is sacrificed to make suit. And that is why we see that the RedBulls qualifying advantage is not the huge one second gaps we were using to seeing in 2012.

[Kiwi Nick]

This is the section of the FIA F1 Technical regulations that govern traction control...you decide.

9.3 Traction control :
No car may be equipped with a system or device which is capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power or of compensating for excessive throttle torque demand by the driver.
Any device or system which notifies the driver of the onset of wheel spin is not permitted.

[Alonsomaniac]

This is the section of the FIA F1 Technical regulations that govern traction control...you decide.

9.3 Traction control :
No car may be equipped with a system or device which is capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power or of compensating for excessive throttle torque demand by the driver.
Any device or system which notifies the driver of the onset of wheel spin is not permitted.

If the KERS system aboard the RB has been changed in way that it is now capable of behaving as a system which is capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power etc. then it is now an illegal KERS system.

That is all I can make out of it.

[Kiwi Nick]

If the KERS system aboard the RB has been changed in way that it is now capable of behaving as a system which is capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power etc. then it is now an illegal KERS system.

That is all I can make out of it.

One could also argue that a "system" that increases downforce, and thus traction, is traction control. The "rocket fuel" system, as I understand it, does just that. But, that is not what they meant when the regs were written. On the other hand, the regs oddly use the words, "capable of preventing" rather than "does prevent". If KERS is in fact "capable" of being used as a TC system, then it should be removed from all cars.

[Hornet]

When people are talking about TC, they are thinking of and referring to the classic built in TC system which is illegal.
RB are not using that because it would be discovered immediately.
But now it seems they have found a way to use a legal system , KERS, to function effectively as a form of tractioncontrol. Very clever, and as long as you don't know what you are looking for, you will not find it.
Now, is this legal?
That depends on what the rule says: if the rule says a TC system is not allowed, then it is perfectly legal because indeed no TC system is present. They use another system to function like one.
But if the rule says that ANY FORM of TC is forbidden, then the car is illegal.

Simple as that.

Where did you read that?

I hope they actually provide an explanation of how KERS can be use to cut off throttle during a wheel spin rather than just randomly point at a component without offering any explanation.

[Hornet]

Ted explain in FP2 that Renault engine does cut its cylinders down to 4 at the exit of corner and this is done from the torque map (sky mentioned that term torque map). This is perfectly legal. They do not use the ECU to cut the cylinders base on rear wheel feedback (closed loop traction control) , but rather the mapping cut the cylinders all the time time when they are accelerating out of corners.

This was what people heard about Vettel's engine. Cylinders were cut which is why it sounded like traction control.

[stefa]

I remember back in 1994, there was so much talks about MS Benetton about regularity, and at the end nothing happed. Now, with RB so much influence and having triple WDC driver at the team heading for his fourth crown, sadly, but I think NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!

[macks]

from f1technical by n smikle

My very reliable sources tell me that Redbull have a special lining of ultra high density solid fuel coated inside the exhaust pipes. It it aslo rumoured that RedBull also have higher than normal levels of hydrogen carriers in their fuel.

Sebastian Vettels sets his engine to "G-9", this is a special engine map that allows semi-lean engine cycling and post inginition to create very high exhaust gas temperatures. The solid fuel coating on inner surface of the exhaust pipes activates and evaporates. The fuel reacts with the excess air in the exhaust gas stream. Though burning at a moderate rate, the explosion from the solid fuel air mixture is still expansive enough to increase the energy of the exhaust gasses three-fold.

The fuel is only enough to be used for a few minutes. But with low speed corners, where exhaust blowing is required most, only a small portion of the lap, a few minutes of off throttle is more than enough for Vettel to blast out of corners with a 40 point down-force advantage.

It is said that the number 1 RB-9 car has exhaust pipes that are 5 kilograms heavier than normal. That is how unbelievable dense this slow burning rocket fuel is! Some fuel and balast is sacrificed to make suit. And that is why we see that the RedBulls qualifying advantage is not the huge one second gaps we were using to seeing in 2012.

Wouldn't the storage of fuel outside of the fuel tank be illegal? From a safety point of view lining the exhausts with something as flamable as fuel is incredably dangerous. Surely this is something at least that should be protested if true?

[Alonsomaniac]

Honestly I think we will never know how exactly they did it - or if it is legal or not. RB is operating in a grey area of course and then it is difficult to say if it is according to the rulebook or not. We have seen that many times before.
Newey is very clever. If they found something that makes the car so much faster without breaking the rules I think they deserve a big compliment - and a championship.
But if it turns out to be a very good hidden cheat they should be kicked out immediately.

But as I said, we will probably never know.

[Kiwi Nick]

The rocket fuel system as described in the earlier post is essentially an after burner. Actually, that's pretty cool!

[Hornet]

The rocket fuel system as described in the earlier post is essentially an after burner. Actually, that's pretty cool!

Shouldn't we see flames coming out of the exhaust if its true?

[Bubbles]

The rocket fuel system as described in the earlier post is essentially an after burner. Actually, that's pretty cool!

It is, but at the same time it's kind of scary to think these guys have this up and running and are developing the next version of it.

[Rob]

It is, but at the same time it's kind of scary to think these guys have this up and running and are developing the next version of it.

Well they will not be able to use it next year.

[Bubbles]

Well they will not be able to use it next year.

But they will probably win all the remaining races this year.

[Alonsomaniac]

But they will probably win all the remaining races this year.

NO! I can't accept that! I want at least ONE more Ferrari win this year!!

[Silent Bob]

There is no way that rocket fuel in the manifold system would even be remotely considered legal. one of the more exotic theories, though.

[Sha1]

One could also argue that a "system" that increases downforce, and thus traction, is traction control. The "rocket fuel" system, as I understand it, does just that. But, that is not what they meant when the regs were written. On the other hand, the regs oddly use the words, "capable of preventing" rather than "does prevent". If KERS is in fact "capable" of being used as a TC system, then it should be removed from all cars.

No, you can't argue that at all because traction control has nothing to do with downforce. Traction control is just lines of code that prevent rear wheel slip, usually used in conjunction with ABS. On the other hand, 'exhaust blowing' is also lines of code but that instead let hot exhaust gases blow on bodywork off throttle, thus generating additional downforce and stabilizing the rear of the car, having no impact on wheel rotation.

Both can be considered 'electronic aids' but only one is termed 'traction control'. There's obviously the possibility that Red Bull has some sort of electronic aid that other teams don't, but I very highly doubt that it's traction control. TC wouldn't only impact corner entry (which is the area most have been saying the Red Bull makes strange noises), but through corners and on corner exits as well. Unless they've got a highly advanced system only operating in certain windows, I don't see how they could be using it.

As for the rocket fuel theory... Yeah.

[Winter]

Formula 1 cars today are so (too much) regulated, that it`s almost impossible to make any innovations or great discoveries without making it a judges call.
If RedBull have used something illegal in their cars, it surely would been found out.

[Greig]

Well they will not be able to use it next year.

Why not?

[stefa]

Well they will not be able to use it next year.

We'll see about that...

[Rob]

Why not?

There is no blowing next year, 1 exhaust exit, no rear beam wing and exhaust outlet angle has to 5 degrees. There is NO way to blow any body work at all.

[Rob]

We'll see about that...

Yep, we will.

[Greig]

There is no blowing nest year, 1 exhaust exit, no rear beam wing and exhaust outlet angle has to 5 degrees. There is NO way to blow any body work at all.

But they will still have the torque engine mapping? I am not sure about this fuel in exhaust theory.