94 replies to this topic

[juicy sushi]

Having much more traction will also change the energy demands. Rather than restricting the available energy as much as they have, we might see bigger allowances to enable higher average race pace.

[thegamer23]

[RSRally]

It's barely conceivable what might be possibĺe in terms of acceleration for Gen4 with almost twice the power.

[RSRally]

Looking at the qualy session times in Monaco, it seems 350kw mode was around 0.8s per lap quicker than 300kw mode. They're claiming around 2% better lap times from Gen3 Evo in 350kw mode vs Gen3 original in 350kw which would be almost 2s around Monaco, so that should add up to almost 3s per lap improvement for 350kw 4wd vs 300kw 2wd. That will be a game changer for Attack Mode.

I'm therefore hoping that FE/FIA feel it less important to set energy allowances to encourage peloton racing going forwards, other than on the really fast circuits where it will probably still be necessary as the battery has quite a low capacity.

[thegamer23]

I hope they'll give GEN 3 EVO a proper showrun in Berlin with a driver who tested it (Correia?).

Think thr EVO advantage would be even bigger on such kind of track, wich has quite a few stop&go accelerations.

Or at least, make a real, comparison acceleration challenge with a Gen 3 and a Gen 3 EVO side by side.

They did it back in the day with Gen 1 and Gen 2.

.

 

Edited by thegamer23, 28 April 2024 - 11:24.

[Ben1445]

I'm therefore hoping that FE/FIA feel it less important to set energy allowances to encourage peloton racing going forwards, other than on the really fast circuits where it will probably still be necessary as the battery has quite a low capacity.

Have we established in any concrete manner why the energy limits are as low as they are? Is the peloton racing deliberate or accidental?

Was it that the tyre grip was leaving Attack Mode fairly useless so energy levels were cut to try something new? Or was it that WAE had to lower them (e.g. safety/reliability guarantees) which then led to peloton style at the faster tracks? Or is it a mix of the two?

At the end of the day, if energy limits cannot be raised back up again for whatever reason, they could always avoid peloton style by shortening race distances.

[RSRally]

Well it definitely is deliberately low sometimes. Monaco & Misano they started with 38.5kwh whilst Tokyo was only 32kwh.

I'm pretty sure Attack Mode will work well enough to enable overtaking in Gen3 Evo, so i don't think they would have felt the need to restrict Tokyo to 32kwh.. they will always be regenning regardless which is good.. i just think having drivers 'not wanting to lead' is a hard sell for new fans and not particularly good for marketing electric cars either.

[Ben1445]

I think the Tokyo reduction (like London) was more about keeping broadly consistent race durations more than anything else. Because it’s a fairly slow track layout it’s not that energy hungry, so if they used the 38.5kWh allowance even a fully green flag race might have run to to an hour or more rather then the usual ~50 mins. Think it was also one of the less peloton-y races we’ve had in Gen3.

If they could deploy the 40+ kWh at Portland/Misano etc. to account for the faster tracks and keep the race duration and levels of energy saving in a real sweet spot between a processional sprint and a peloton melee you’d think they would? Which is what makes me think the battery is a limiting factor in the equation.

In any case it does seem that they are not consistently finding that sweet spot at each venue. We haven’t heard a huge amount from the horses mouth as to why, afaik.

[juicy sushi]

I think there probably also is a hidden reason to do with the battery. I think the problems in development meant it’s never quite had the full amount it was supposed to and the series has accidentally found the peleton racing solution while managing the rubbish battery.

[RSRally]

My hope is that with the return of a functioning attack mode we won't need to see either a processional sprint or a peloton melee (apart from at the most energy hungry tracks) in order to create good racing.

[thegamer23]

David Coulthard's GEN 3 Showrun

 

https://twitter.com/...557952017346631

 

 

The car's shape looks great.

It looks lower on track, very menacing and aggressive. Massive step forward in that regard.

Can't say much about the performance, as DC wasn't able to get comfortable and push it properly!

Edited by thegamer23, 28 April 2024 - 15:44.

[Ben1445]

I think there probably also is a hidden reason to do with the battery. I think the problems in development meant it’s never quite had the full amount it was supposed to and the series has accidentally found the peleton racing solution while managing the rubbish battery.

This is my suspicion also. 

 

My hope is that with the return of a functioning attack mode we won't need to see either a processional sprint or a peloton melee (apart from at the most energy hungry tracks) in order to create good racing.

And I think that should happen for the slightly slower tracks on the calendar - Mexico City, Diriyah, Tokyo, London, etc. - where they've been a bit more processional in Gen3.

 

It's pulling back from peloton-style at the faster tracks which I think is less of a given. Unless they can unlock more energy for those races, I think their only options would be to shorten the race or slow the cars down with track modifications. Perhaps either of those could be considered more palatable options than peloton-racing, which I'm guessing is the point you're making... 

 

From what I can tell the optimal sort of range for not too sprint-y, not too peloton-y is an average race pace of approximately 90-95% of qualifying. It's remarkable how many of the Gen3 races have been somewhere either side of that range rather than somewhere within in. 

[thegamer23]

Edited by thegamer23, 29 April 2024 - 12:12.

[Ben1445]

Something I've realised is that there doesn't seem to be much info on (unless I'm blind*) is how much power the front powertrain will be allowed to use when active, nor what the max permitted power across both axels would be. 
 
Currently the cars have their own 350kW-rated motor on the rear, and the 250kW spec FPK on the front for 600kW total installed power. Maximum regen is that full 600kW, whilst deployment at the rear is limited to 300kW in the race and 350kW in Qualy/Attack. 
 
The only reference to how much power the FPK will be allowed to put down I can find (weirdly?) appears to be via Craig Scarborough(@ScarbsTech) in this tweet, which says that it would be 150kW from the front for a 470hp (350kW) total power in 4WD mode. 

 

If accurate*, that would be 150kW from the front and 200kW on the rear when in 4WD mode. 

 

Which is interesting perhaps for the the development of motors for the next homologation cycle in Gen3Evo. Currently, given the regulations, the manufacture's rear motor would presumably have been optimised to deliver 300-350kW of power at any given time. If the new motors would have to be delivering between 200kW and 300kW, that's a different scenario to be optimising to with a different, wider window.

 

Would love to know more about what impact that might have on motor design. If you optimised the rear motor wholly around the 300kW point you might be more efficient in races, but slightly less efficient during 200kW output in qualifying and visa versa. Maybe it's a very marginal thing, but if you lost the championship because your rival got more pole positions then could be important. Or maybe it's too small to worry too much about and the driver and engineer's skills with tyre management is what makes the real difference...

 

Would still love to have some strong and consistent technical reporting around FE to answer these questions. 

 

_{*edit: quite possibly not, given that Autosport reports 50kW}

Edited by Ben1445, 29 April 2024 - 10:56.

[Hyatt]

btw: are axial flux motors used anywhere in FE? powerdensity appears to be almost astronomical there ...

[RSRally]

Something I've realised is that there doesn't seem to be much info on (unless I'm blind) is how much power the front powertrain will be allowed to use when active, nor what the max permitted power across both axels would be.

Currently the cars have their own 350kW-rated motor on the rear, and the 250kW spec FPK on the front for 600kW total installed power. Maximum regen is that full 600kW, whilst deployment at the rear is limited to 300kW in the race and 350kW in Qualy/Attack.

The only reference to how much power the FPK will be allowed to put down I can find (weirdly?) appears to be via Craig Scarborough(@ScarbsTech) in this tweet, which says that it would be 150kW from the front for a 470hp (350kW) total power in 4WD mode.

If accurate, that would be 150kW from the front and 200kW on the rear when in 4WD mode.

Which is interesting perhaps for the the development of motors for the next homologation cycle in Gen3Evo. Currently, given the regulations, the manufacture's rear motor would presumably have been optimised to deliver 300-350kW of power at any given time. If the new motors would have to be delivering between 200kW and 300kW, that's a different scenario to be optimising to with a different, wider window.

Would love to know more about what impact that might have on motor design. If you optimised the rear motor wholly around the 300kW point you might be more efficient in races, but slightly less efficient during 200kW output in qualifying and visa versa. Maybe it's a very marginal thing, but if you lost the championship because your rival got more pole positions then could be important. Or maybe it's too small to worry too much about and the driver and engineer's skills with tyre management is what makes the real difference...

Would still love to have some strong and consistent technical reporting around FE to answer these questions.

I heard somewhere the front motor would only be 50kw. I'll try and find the source!

Edit, here: https://www.autospor...cover/10603249/

Edited by RSRally, 29 April 2024 - 10:44.

[Ben1445]

btw: are axial flux motors used anywhere in FE? powerdensity appears to be almost astronomical there ...

 Here's one source I have found on this from 2021: 
 

"At their current state of development, radial flux machines pip axial flux technology when it comes to ultimate power and efficiency. For example, Formula E initially saw a range of both motor types deployed by teams, as engineers worked out the most efficient means to maximize energy usage. Some used the high torque output of axial flux to reduce the number of transmission ratios needed and thus frictional losses, while others deployed a greater number of gears with higher-rpm radial flux designs.

However, advances in the latter’s design have seen their torque density grow along with operating speed, enabling their use with single-speed transmissions, for a more efficient overall drivetrain package. Now the entire field uses radial flux solutions, considered the most efficient approach under the current regulations."

 

https://www.pmw-maga...ology-pt-2.html

 

I'm not aware of any major design trend changes since then, and it remains the case in Formula E that efficiency is king. 

[Ben1445]

I heard somewhere the front motor would only be 50kw. I'll try and find the source!

Edit, here: https://www.autospor...cover/10603249/

Thanks -  it seems I am blind! 

 

I wonder where Craig Scarborough got his 150kW figure from. 

[RSRally]

I did wonder whether Autosport had confused Attack Mode giving an extta 50kw with that 50kw coming from the front motor but it would make sense in relation to the point you made about the rear motors already being optimised for 300kw.

[juicy sushi]

I would’ve preferred going a little crazier and doing 350kw fulltime from the rear with 50 from the front…

Edited by juicy sushi, 29 April 2024 - 11:54.

[thegamer23]

At 1.20 you can see a (very brief) glimpise of the car's acceleration before he slows down again!

 

Edited by thegamer23, 29 April 2024 - 12:13.

[Ben1445]

I would’ve preferred going a little crazier and doing 350kw fulltime from the rear with 50 from the front…

Might largely be battery capability dependant, but there would by precedent to do do something like that in the second year of Gen3Evo.

It would be a shame (IMO) for the updates as they are with a more potent Attack Mode to pull the perceived necessity of the peloton effect back into a more optimal zone, only to kick it back out again with a 50kW total power increase.

Edited by Ben1445, 29 April 2024 - 12:17.

[thegamer23]

From his twitter, some details from Lucas Di Grassi's latest private test with the Lola GEN 3 EVO!

"Over 1600 km of tests done with LOLA GEN 3 EVO car.

"The car is 4 seconds faster than last year, and accelerates in 1.86 sec from 0-100 km/h!" 

 

https://x.com/Lucasd...1370214/photo/1
 

It's the first time we hear somebody talking about actual seconds rather than a generic "improvement" in lap time.

Will it be confirmed during the season? Would be massive if true!

 

Talking about the aesthetics: it looks way better than GEN 3, much more of an aggressive looking open wheeler race car!
Think we're in for a very interesting Season 11!
 

 

Previous GEN 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Previous GEN 3 

 

Edited by thegamer23, 10 August 2024 - 13:40.

[RSRally]

Sounds good, 4s over what lap length though? And we should remember that it'll only be in Attack Mode/Qualy Knockouts that it achieves that..

Should be quicker in normal mode too though with grippier tyres!

[RSRally]

Love that, reminds me of an old Forti F1 car.

[Wes350]

Have we established in any concrete manner why the energy limits are as low as they are? Is the peloton racing deliberate or accidental?
...
At the end of the day, if energy limits cannot be raised back up again for whatever reason, they could always avoid peloton style by shortening race distances.

 

The peloton racing is absolutely deliberate:

 

 

https://www.racecar-...s-so-different/

 

 

The Formula E rules have been written to force teams to utilise the energy from the battery as efficiently as possible. Before each race, the FIA dictates the number of laps and the amount of energy teams may use. Typically, this is around 25 per cent less than what is needed to complete the race, which is why they need to implement energy management techniques and regenerate energy to ensure they reach the finish line.

 

They deliberately castrate the cars so that they have to harvest for energy during the race, because they want to show off the regen electric technology  or something...

 

I basically tuned out shortly after they stopped car-hopping, and the peloton racing started.

 

I fully agree with Dario's commentary that they should have changed nothing and just let the cars race faster to show people how quick they could go.

 

I still think that's what they should do:

 

1: Match the race distance to the cars going flat out with the battery available - but one lap short to have a small energy reserve.

 

2: Give them an 'attack button' mode  that give them 3-6 seconds of extra boost. This will have natural limits as it takes from their energy store - so they will have to do the FIA's beloved 'regen' to repeatedly use it.

 

3: Just give them the best slicks that the tire supplier can make, and a dedicated rain tire. It's a sprint, so just let them go at it.

 

 

The least they could do is to try and put on the best racing that they possibly can.

 

But the FIA and the promoter clearly have other considerations that they are catering to.

[juicy sushi]

If only that were actually the truth.  While they have leaned into the peleton racing, the battery difficulties which are emphatically not being detailed in public have led to significantly greater restrictions on available energy than had been originally intended.  The by-product was a significant increase in the peleton effect during races as a result of the need to work within the available energy restrictions.  If the cars had more available energy, the peleton effect would be much less, but the batteries as delivered were so far away from the spec requested that the result is the current situation.

[Wes350]

If only that were actually the truth.  While they have leaned into the peleton racing, the battery difficulties which are emphatically not being detailed in public have led to significantly greater restrictions on available energy than had been originally intended.  The by-product was a significant increase in the peleton effect during races as a result of the need to work within the available energy restrictions.  If the cars had more available energy, the peleton effect would be much less, but the batteries as delivered were so far away from the spec requested that the result is the current situation.

 

They say that they are cutting the energy 25% short of what the cars need to do a race. The reasons behind that are actually irrelevant to my point.

 

Because either way they are intentionally castrating the racing.

 

Because it changes nothing about Dario's point: Just keep the car-swap!

 

If they cannot bring themselves to publicly say that the batteries are not ready for a full race distance race yet - that is on them...

Edited by Wes350, 13 August 2024 - 19:34.

[juicy sushi]

I think you do not understand.  The Gen2 car had no issues doing a full race distance.  The issue was a specific supplier issue with the Gen3 battery.  Given that they have not been swapping cars in over half a decade, and no one wants to go back to that, your suggestions make little sense.  The racing hasn't been intentionally castrated.  The cars have, like they always have had, a fixed amount of energy to start the race.  The fastest car to finish a race distance is the winner.  No change there.  The cars are completing their race distances faster in Gen3, even with the compromised battery, than they did in either Gen1 with its car swaps, or Gen2 when the cars were not swapping.  And next year, with the EVO package allowing significantly higher performance through the AWD in attack mode and the stickier tires, the cars will be faster still.  At no point in FE's history did the cars start the race with enough energy to finish, in any generation.  The difference is now that the cars are recovering considerably more during a race than they did in the past.  

[sgtkate]

They say that they are cutting the energy 25% short of what the cars need to do a race. The reasons behind that are actually irrelevant to my point.

Because either way they are intentionally castrating the racing.

Because it changes nothing about Dario's point: Just keep the car-swap!

If they cannot bring themselves to publicly say that the batteries are not ready for a full race distance race yet - that is on them...

F1 races have tyre and fuel management throughout often making them run 5-6s a lap slower than without management. Do you think they are castrated?

[RSRally]

Since the regen IS the braking now there will always be regen but that is a different thing from early lift&coast and the peloton racing.

Sometimes it is deliberate, they have not always started the races with a full battery. Sometimes it's not. A better battery would have meant we didn't have the extreme pelotoning such as in Misano and Portland.

[Wes350]

F1 races have tyre and fuel management throughout often making them run 5-6s a lap slower than without management. Do you think they are castrated?

 

Yes. 

 

 

I think you do not understand.  The Gen2 car had no issues doing a full race distance.  The issue was a specific supplier issue with the Gen3 battery.  Given that they have not been swapping cars in over half a decade, and no one wants to go back to that, your suggestions make little sense.  The racing hasn't been intentionally castrated.  The cars have, like they always have had, a fixed amount of energy to start the race.  The fastest car to finish a race distance is the winner.  No change there.  The cars are completing their race distances faster in Gen3, even with the compromised battery, than they did in either Gen1 with its car swaps, or Gen2 when the cars were not swapping.  And next year, with the EVO package allowing significantly higher performance through the AWD in attack mode and the stickier tires, the cars will be faster still.  At no point in FE's history did the cars start the race with enough energy to finish, in any generation.  The difference is now that the cars are recovering considerably more during a race than they did in the past.  

 

Which is why Dario complained at the time that making one car do the full distance was a mistake - he knew they would be doing the 'regen' nonsense.  He thought that they should be running as flat-out as they can, which means that they should have kept the car swap.

 

FE does not want to go back to the car-swapping because they want to make the whole 'regen' thing an important part of the race. That's on them.

 

None of which has anything to do with my point, that like Dario at the time; I feel that the racing product would be better if they let the cars go flat out. Even if that means keeping the car-swapping.

 

With improved batteries they could go even faster, further, and race harder.  

 

I also readily acknowledge that FE will never do this.

 

They have their reasons. I just think that those reasons are wrong.

Edited by Wes350, 13 August 2024 - 23:21.

[thegamer23]

To be fair, we had scenarios during last few seasons were cars went flatout (like after a SC or in the latter parts of the race).

And... not a lot was happening.
The FE field is very tight in terms of peak performance, so going flat out can mean big trains of cars, unable to make moves.

But i would like to see the race format of the double headers being structured with a sprint, flatout race on Saturday to showcase the speed of the cars and a longer main race, with energy management and max efficency required.

And this idea is floating around behind the scenes, FE's ceo have been interested in that, so it could happen!

[RSRally]

Flatout racing could now work with Attack Mode being much more potent.

As thegamer23 says the cars are fairly evenly matched so without a functioning Attack Mode the only way to create 'racing' was via differnces in efficiencies between cars.

[Sterzo]

Flatout racing could now work with Attack Mode being much more potent.

As thegamer23 says the cars are fairly evenly matched so without a functioning Attack Mode the only way to create 'racing' was via differnces in efficiencies between cars.

There is another philosophy available, which is that with evenly-matched cars the drivers make the difference. Works in quite a few formulae. My worry is that increasing speeds on tight circuits will make the racing worse, not better.

[thegamer23]

More GEN 3 EVO development news   

 

 

 

 

 

Pascal Wehrlein after GEN 3 EVO test: "Traction control is costantly being improved"

 

https://e-formula.ne...-improved-61316

This is big, and maybe came un-noticed, but in short

 

Traction Control will be allowed next season when using the All Wheel drive (quali, race start, attack mode)

 

And, according to Wehrlein, will make 3 to 4 seconds lap difference. 

 

 

 

Mahindra getting their first Gen 3 EVO runs with Jordan King!

 

Edited by thegamer23, 23 August 2024 - 17:03.

[RSRally]

Interesting that the new front wing actually does make a difference to the balance and it's not just for show.

3-4s lap difference will definitely make attack mode very potent so that will be a big change to the racing from the first two years of Gen3. However, to exploit that to it's full potential they'll need the energy to do so. I can imagine they'll really just use it to make overtaking moves rather than charging off down the road and making a big gap.

Edited by RSRally, 24 August 2024 - 08:42.

[RSRally]

Chat with Mahindra dudes re: Gen3 Evo

https://youtu.be/Pai...M9p4cMSnwZ8qQy3

[thegamer23]

New Saudi Arabia Location for next season!

Gen 3 Evos will be unleashed in Jeddah!

 

Pretty sure they'll use the WTCR shortened layout, wich was quite good imho.

 

Edited by thegamer23, 03 September 2024 - 17:53.

[RSRally]

Was there a reason FE couldn't go to Diryah any more or is this about prepping for faster Gen 3.5/4 cars?

[thegamer23]

Think there are some redeveloping workshop planned in Diriyah, so they can't host the race in 2025.

Also i think FE was starting to out grow that circuit.
Was already pretty tight with base Gen 3, with Gen 3 evo maybe it would have been too much.

Think Jeddah could be quite an interesting location, the WTCR races on the short layout were pretty hectic there.

Edited by thegamer23, 04 September 2024 - 06:21.

[thegamer23]

Brief trackside video of the Lola Gen 3.5 with Di Grassi at the wheel

https://x.com/i/stat...688381538951654

 

 

It's got a bit different sound than usual too! 

Edited by thegamer23, 05 September 2024 - 14:26.

[RSRally]

I'd really like to see some footage of the new car exiting from slow corners in 4wd mode. That's where we'll see the difference.

[thegamer23]

Getting closer to the pre-season, step by step.

Season 11 Thread coming soon   

 

 

Nissan, Jaguar, Lola and DS Penske have been out GEN 3 EVO testing last week.

The former three were at Varano in Italy, while DS used the Ales track in the south of France. Rowland, Evans, di Grassi and Gunther among the drivers in action #FormulaE

 

 

 

 

Edited by thegamer23, 12 September 2024 - 09:09.

[RSRally]

The potential prospect of wet races with 4wd Gen3 Evo just occurred to me, could be fun!