2025/2026 Hybrid Powerunit speculation

[mzso]

That doesn't seem realistic. The ICE itself can't get to 70%, which can only get worse with the conversions after.

There are barely any hybrids of notability. They're like that because it's easier to just slap on an electric motor. Not because it's more efficient, because it isn't.

70% crank to wheels, when is passes through an electric generator-charger-battery-motor setup. Compared to over 96% for a mechanical link/gearbox.

Invalid comparison. (Also, I'm doubtful of you number) It would be same or better from the electric motor to the wheel.
If you naively compare only ICE output to wheel with and without the electric motor you miss the point.
The ICE on its own practically never runs at peak efficiency, nor is it designed for peak efficiency. The point would be to do the opposite to run a generator to supply an electric traction motor. And it would still be more efficient than the ICE on its own. With of course carrying as large capacity batteries as practical.

[Holm86]

2025 is only 4 years away, and the teams need at least a couple of years to develop the new powertrain.
When can we expect the regulations to be almost totally defined?? Can't remember when the 2014 engine regulations was set? 2011??

[Stu]

That doesn't seem realistic. The ICE itself can't get to 70%, which can only get worse with the conversions after.

There are barely any hybrids of notability. They're like that because it's easier to just slap on an electric motor. Not because it's more efficient, because it isn't.

70% crank to wheels, when is passes through an electric generator-charger-battery-motor setup. Compared to over 96% for a mechanical link/gearbox.

Invalid comparison. (Also, I'm doubtful of you number) It would be same or better from the electric motor to the wheel.
If you naively compare only ICE output to wheel with and without the electric motor you miss the point.
The ICE on its own practically never runs at peak efficiency, nor is it designed for peak efficiency. The point would be to do the opposite to run a generator to supply an electric traction motor. And it would still be more efficient than the ICE on its own. With of course carrying as large capacity batteries as practical.

Exactly, it should considered as a holistic system. Very brave too, I was challenged as being blasphemous when I doubted the search for efficiency on pre-2014 F1 engines!!

I would imagine that series hybrid would be attractive to manufacturers.

[Tommy Cookers]

...The ICE on its own practically never runs at peak efficiency, nor is it designed for peak efficiency. The point would be to do the opposite to run a generator to supply an electric traction motor. And it would still be more efficient than the ICE on its own. With of course carrying as large capacity batteries as practical.

Exactly, it should considered as a holistic system. ...

a 450 kW ICE driving a 450 kW generator driving MGs/ES of 750 kW capability .... weighs how much ???

(compared to the conventional) if such a car weighs eg 25% more and laps 1 second slower ....
it is more efficient in scientific terms but less efficient in real terms
(so not a holistic system ?)


how about adding a compressive ES also energised by waste heat - and air motors ? ... and/or .... steam ?
this would greatly increase 'science-nerd's efficiency'

[gruntguru]

. . . While the proportion of hybrids on the roads is quite low, the idea of a plug-in charge system is not a bad idea (reasonably cheap to fill the battery), but when 75% plus of all vehicles are electric or hybrid the electrical grid does not have the infrastructure to cope (I’m talking UK). It will also NOT be a cheap fill-up. We know what electrical charges are planned to be in 2030-35 as the owners/builders at the new Hinckley Point power station have been guaranteed a £/kWh for generation (I’m going to check, but I seem to recall £0.90/kWh) that is substantially higher than current charges -500% increase.

Is that a government guarantee? Sounds like astronomical stupidity when electricity generation costs around the world are falling with the adoption of renewables. Who will be able to afford to switch on their lights?
Further - with the UK net-zero CO2 by 2050 target, the cost of fossil fuel will have to increase very steeply to encourage owners to power their car from the grid (or one of the less likely zero emission transport solutions).

[Stu]

. . . While the proportion of hybrids on the roads is quite low, the idea of a plug-in charge system is not a bad idea (reasonably cheap to fill the battery), but when 75% plus of all vehicles are electric or hybrid the electrical grid does not have the infrastructure to cope (I’m talking UK). It will also NOT be a cheap fill-up. We know what electrical charges are planned to be in 2030-35 as the owners/builders at the new Hinckley Point power station have been guaranteed a £/kWh for generation (I’m going to check, but I seem to recall £0.90/kWh) that is substantially higher than current charges -500% increase.

Is that a government guarantee? Sounds like astronomical stupidity when electricity generation costs around the world are falling with the adoption of renewables. Who will be able to afford to switch on their lights?
Further - with the UK net-zero CO2 by 2050 target, the cost of fossil fuel will have to increase very steeply to encourage owners to power their car from the grid (or one of the less likely zero emission transport solutions).

https://medium.com/generation-atomic/th ... 9b1aa05c27

Apologies, they were promised £92.50/MWh by the UK government (referenced to 2012 prices - so these will increase in line with RPI presumably), that is more than double the market rate (not the 500% that I suggested, but still a terrible deal!).

Anyway, F1 power units for the next raft of tech regs....

[mzso]

a 450 kW ICE driving a 450 kW generator driving MGs/ES of 750 kW capability .... weighs how much ???

Remains to be seen. Who knows what F1 designers would come up with. It would also depend on batteries. The more can be used, and the more regeneration can be used, the more it would decrease the ICE/generator requirements.

(compared to the conventional) if such a car weighs eg 25% more and laps 1 second slower ....
it is more efficient in scientific terms but less efficient in real terms
(so not a holistic system ?)

Huh? There's no such thing as separate "scientific" and "real" efficiency.

Anyway, if the main drive force is electrification, then +1s lap time is irrelevant. It's pretty much nothing anyway. No-one but the drivers would perceive it.

[J.A.W.]

a 450 kW ICE driving a 450 kW generator driving MGs/ES of 750 kW capability .... weighs how much ???

Remains to be seen. Who knows what F1 designers would come up with. It would also depend on batteries. The more can be used, and the more regeneration can be used, the more it would decrease the ICE/generator requirements.

(compared to the conventional) if such a car weighs eg 25% more and laps 1 second slower ....
it is more efficient in scientific terms but less efficient in real terms
(so not a holistic system ?)

Huh? There's no such thing as separate "scientific" and "real" efficiency.

Anyway, if the main drive force is electrification, then +1s lap time is irrelevant. It's pretty much nothing anyway. No-one but the drivers would perceive it.

Hardly, since "real" race winning efficiency to the tune of even a seemingly "irrelevant" 1 second per
lap advantage will give both a handy pole position on the grid, & veritable 'country mile' worth of
lead/winning margin gap too, at the end of ~ an hour & a 1/2's G.P. race distance...

[Tommy Cookers]

.... Huh? There's no such thing as separate "scientific" and "real" efficiency.

there is such a thing .....
if/when the car that turns 110 kg of fuel into the most at-axle energy loses the race because it's heavier and slower
of course this can be prevented by rigging the rules eg 950 kg minimum weight

Sterling cycle heat engines are very 'efficient' but heavy and bulky

rules are already rigged allowing only electrical KE recovery - if F1 was on high ovals there would be no KE recovery

[henry]

Here’s a few numbers on energy recovery from braking.

Brembo used to produce what they called Brake Circuit Identity Cards. I have 3 from 2014. They have braking duration and average power for each corner. From these we can get the overall energy dissipated per lap and the average braking power for the lap.

Silverstone 10MJ 1200kW
Canada 14.5MJ 1400kW
Austria 15.6MJ 1500kW

The theoretical upper bound of energy recovery is Kpower/Average power x Lap Energy

For K = 120KW
Silverstone 1MJ
Canada 1.2MJ
Austria 1.2MJ

If the K is increased the recovery goes up but not proportionately because the speed below which this power would lock the rear brakes goes up.

A 450kW MGU acting on the rear wheels has a theoretical energy recovery 3.75x higher but would lock the rear axle at 200 KPH, maybe higher and so the energy recovery would be much less.

Of course one could change the car rules to suit with a rearward bias to mass and downforce.

[mzso]

.... Huh? There's no such thing as separate "scientific" and "real" efficiency.

there is such a thing .....
if/when the car that turns 110 kg of fuel into the most at-axle energy loses the race because it's heavier and slower
of course this can be prevented by rigging the rules eg 950 kg minimum weight

Sterling cycle heat engines are very 'efficient' but heavy and bulky

rules are already rigged allowing only electrical KE recovery - if F1 was on high ovals there would be no KE recovery

That's not called efficiency...

[mzso]

Well, digesting the points raised just further reaffirms that there's no point in going forward with ICE, if we're chasing efficiency and electrification, the way I see it.

• There's nothing better than the piston engines in a developed stage, even if there was the gains would be modest compared to the current 50% unless they'd somehow increase the combustion temperature to 3000K or such, which I don't see happening.
  And it most definitely wouldn't be cheap or simple. Nor would be to development of something like the Liquidpiston rotary or opposed piston engines, nearly from scratch. The current high-efficiency combustion tech proved to be very costly to begin with.
  (the latter is mentioned sporadically but I fail to see any particular reason why it would have a significant efficiency gain compared to standard layouts.)
• And above this all there's the issue of either having the engine, and the inherent inefficiency that comes with having them run at different RPM/load/power. As well as needing to resort MGU-H/K for recovery and the complexity/cost that comes with. Or having series hybrids that probably will have a substantial weight penalty.

So all-in-all the best way to go would be having Solid-oxide fuel cells, running on some (bio/synthetic) fuel suitable for it.
I see that the weight/volume is not that far off (if at all in handicap) from matching current F1 cars, if you keep in mind the freed up weight after you throw out the ICE and much of the transmission, cooling system:
https://technology.nasa.gov/patent/LEW-TOPS-120
And this is with tiny effort, compared the totality of the automotive industry that has focuses on ICEs for a century.

(I didn't factor in shallow romanticization, because that's meaningless and irrelevant.)

[godlameroso]

a 450 kW ICE driving a 450 kW generator driving MGs/ES of 750 kW capability .... weighs how much ???

Remains to be seen. Who knows what F1 designers would come up with. It would also depend on batteries. The more can be used, and the more regeneration can be used, the more it would decrease the ICE/generator requirements.

(compared to the conventional) if such a car weighs eg 25% more and laps 1 second slower ....
it is more efficient in scientific terms but less efficient in real terms
(so not a holistic system ?)

Huh? There's no such thing as separate "scientific" and "real" efficiency.

Anyway, if the main drive force is electrification, then +1s lap time is irrelevant. It's pretty much nothing anyway. No-one but the drivers would perceive it.

Tell that to the petrol makers with their MON and RON.

[mzso]

Did the FIA set a deadline to themselves, for the new PU regulations?

[J.A.W.]

Now, IF you want a 'best bang for the bucks' approach, (& with a similar
disregard for road-going emissions reg's as shown by the present F1 ICE),
then here's one dramatic way of making power/sound/speed: