Kers (kinetic energy regeneration)
 

Hello,

I've just got round to actually getting myself setup properly on this forum (just need to add my car - tomorrow)

Anyway....this is only a 'feeler' as to what people think.

I have been looking at the various ways of boosting our cars s/c , turbo, nitrous... all good options - but more often than not need a lot of work and $$$$.

Been looking at KERS. Ferrari have it, Porsche are looking into it etc etc. My question is ..."what is the option of introducing KERS to our cars?'....
Talking about the flywheel KERS version. Wouldn't it be something else to have a 60kw system on tap at a press of a button. Acceleration and torque all the way....very green :)

Please feel free to Google search KERS and it's applications.

I know a decent amount about KERS, but wouldn't you spend even more adapting this to our cars?
And you can only use that "boost" in spurts

could someone explain how KERS works?

from what i have read, its some type of electric motor that adds power some how and can only be used in small bursts but i havent been able to figure out how it works

It's regenerative breaking, easiest example being the Prius, you press the brakes, it recharges the battery. You then use that power to accelerate from the next light.

oh so pretty much is uses motors to generate electricity? then you can use that electricity to spin the motors forward giving you acceleration?

that kind of makes sense but why not just go with a turbo setup with antilag?

Lol, yessir, and that's exactly what I'm wondering... Adding KERS to any car isn't efficient in any way over a turbo setup IMO

i guess if it was used in conjunction with a turbo or supercharger setup it could be beneficial but to add a system like that to the Z would probably cost more than having a turbo kit installed professionally and custom dyno tuned

im just gonna stick with nos when it comes to temp power, its cheaper and easier to setup

Yeah, I think all the NOS in the world would be cheaper and easier to install than KERS in our cars...

The obvious questions are how much weight to have enough storage to make it useful and where are you going to put the cells in our already tight cars? Also, does this fit the model of the average Z driver? Regenerative braking is most helpful in city stop/go driving.

Besides all that, the cost would kill it.

Have KERS store electricity in a battery due from braking and then use that energy to power a electric motor to quickly spool up a turbo or supercharger system. Adding electric drive motors to the wheels or tranny would be a great experiment but very costly to do, and you would never mass produce it as a kit. That's why the oem have engineering staff.

Judging by some of the backmarkers, notably Marussia in F1, not having the funds to get this to work on their cars, I fail to see how this is a viable option over a turbo on a road car that doesn't have KERS from the factory.

can you explain how that will work?

Just so you know no one here knows anything about KERS. Otherwise someone would have pointed out that it is not Kinetic Energy Regeneration. It is Kinetic Energy Recovery System.

That is a awesome idea for street cars. I had never thought about that.

While KERS is a great concept and several companies are bringing viable products to market, retrofitting KERS for performance gains would be a costly, complicated affair that would add considerable weight. One might be able to design/install a KERS MPG booster, but I wouldn't expect great power/performance gains from a homebrew system.


Edit: I'm not trying to talk anybody out of doing it - if someone can put a jet turbine in a VW, KERS in a 370Z is possible - just be aware that it is not the typical DIY project and will require a lot of engineering know-how.

no one ever called it kinetic energy regeneration

KERS uses kinetic energy regeneration to recharge the power pack and if you knew anything about how it worked, you wouldnt have posted such a pointless post

now please educate yourself on how this system works before posting....
here is some material that will help you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=QibB4DxkasQ

A kinetic energy recovery system (often known simply as KERS) is an automotive system for recovering a moving vehicle's kinetic energy under braking. The recovered energy is stored in a reservoir (for example a flywheel or a battery) for later use under acceleration.

Kinetic energy recovery system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia is a great source of information for people who have never heard of it. Most use a flywheel for simplicity and weight savings rather then charge a battery or capacitor.

They will likely adapt this technology in future road going sports cars, until then, its an extremely expensive exercise that's not guaranteed to produce any viable benefits. You're adding power, but the system itself adds weight a lot of unknowns to the car. A system similar to the one used in F1 could cost more than the our car considering the F1 gearbox run north of $130k each. There are easier and cheaper ways to add 80-100hp in 6 second spurts.

One look at the title of the thread and two it isn't regeneration. You don't recreate the energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It recovers the energy. At least now I know ONE here knows nothing about physics or KERS.

While I was exaggerating on the "no one knows anything thing" I don't think regeneration and recovery can be interchanged. Recreating and recovering are totally different things.

Exactly and regeneration is (from dictionary.com) "to re-create , reconstitute, or make over, especially in a better form or condition." When KERS is used the energy is recovered during braking and used to produce more power. It does not regenerated energy. It never re-creates the energy. It takes one form and changes it, and puts it to use somewhere else. If you could regenerate energy then you breaking Einstein's law of conservation of energy. That is why it is a huge problem (when describing something as complex as KERS) if that specific word is used instead of recover.
BTW since you attempted to go all, I'm smart I know Hyperbole. Hyperbole is always inaccurate. It is a speech tool used to show a strong feel towards something it is not meant to be taken literally. Saying inaccurate hyperbole is like using a double negative. It makes you sound like a moron. I wasn't trying to create an argument here. I was trying to alert the OP that he should take everything he hears from the people posting with a grain of salt.

Energy regeneration brake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_brake


It is a widely accepted misnomer.

also, mixing Dictionary.com definitions with terminology specific to a field makes no sense.

Da hell is the point of this thread???????

Well since you failed to argue your point I guess you are saying that I am correct.
Also "I've been called a lot worse than "moron" by ppl a lot better than you." And your point. You basically said that multiple people have called you a moron. That's not really a good thing. Sorry I called you moron ;).

Since you like the Dictionary.com definition above so much, why didn't you post the whole thing?


re·gen·er·ate
[ri-jen-uh-reyt; ri-jen-er-it] Show IPA verb, re·gen·er·at·ed, re·gen·er·at·ing, adjective.
verb (used with object)
1.
to effect a complete moral reform in.
2.
to re-create, reconstitute, or make over, especially in a better form or condition.
3.
to revive or produce anew; bring into existence again.
4.
Biology . to renew or restore (a lost, removed, or injured part).
5.
Physics. to restore (a substance) to a favorable state or physical condition.

I actually didn't see the other definition I am on mobile and it didn't show up. Although you did add the physics part at no point did it say physics. I still think that using regeneration is wrong though. I have never heard someone use the word regenerate to mean gather.

sure it is. The capstone work I did that inspired my thesis was about the efficacy of supercapacitor arrays for regenerative braking.


I hope they don't take my degree away as a result of this thread.

Surprise! :eek:

I agree about the use of a super capacitor for KERS in a road car. I think that because of the danger of fires during the use of them it is unlikely they will be used, it will most likely be mechanical in the future. But regardless did you really need to flash your degree. Lol. :p Also when did I argue against you thoughts about the use of super capacitors. I just wanted the OP to know that you aren't magically creating the energy it is being recovered from somewhere else. That is all I have said yet people a flipping out. I am not trying to argue I'm just trying to help out the op. As I said before he should be careful about listening to the people on this thread. Including me. All I know about KERS is what I have read. I am not an expert on it. I am just trying to add what I have read so that the wrong idea is not given. So please. Lighten up.

And lastly my most important part about the definition. Is it says to restore a substance to its original state. Is energy a substance. Didn't think so.

Regenerative is a perfectly fine word to use to describe the system. You came in with an attitude, and I just pointed out it wasn't really a point worth arguing.

As far as your comment about fire risk from supercaps in a road car...they're certainly safer than the batteries hybrids run now, and Tesla doesn't seem to have any issues with them in their road cars.


Again, dictionary.com is not where I would go for definitions, and it is parenthesized for a reason.


Energy does have some substance like properties, though. It is actually a curious task to try to nail down the definition of just what energy is.

First of I think you mid interpreted my attitude I was trying to be sarcastic in my original post. 'Jokes heard of em' (that's sarcasm as well) lol. But anyways I still don't think regeneration can be used in this situation. Can you regenerate energy. No.

Now onto the capacitors.

Really. That's great I personally think that the electric option would be more efficient in the future. I hadn't read anything about them becoming safer, but I guess they are still used so it makes sense.

Explain how?

Lol!! This thread turned hilarious!

That was my fault. I guess if it is a fault. It is quite entertaining. Anyways my bad.

My apologies to PEPI for cluttering up his thread. I've deleted my off topic comments pertaining to usage of terms. Everything I said was quoted at one place or the other, so it's all still in the thread - it just won't waste as much space now.
If anyone wants to claim a "victory" in the "debate" because I refuse to beat my head against a wall, go ahead. I have a tough hide and can take it. ;)

I don;t know why I bother to post anything in this forum anymore.

Haven't you been to the Internet. What do you expect from a forum. Lol :p people always jump on what you say.

Yep your right no point to contribute to this pile of **** forum.

Good riddance