2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[ringo]

Look where the first gear starts and ends. Now look at the 7th.
Those are 2 different ratios, one will give you the high wheel forces that you need, the other will give you the top speed, but low force.

You can't have your cake an eat it. The only way one gear can span the whole wheel speed and have the same intial wheel forces, is if you engine can run with the road speed.

If you want to go 197mph with the high torque benefits of a first gear of 3.99:1 and final drive of 3.32, as your single gear, your engine has to rev to 40,000 rpm.
But since it can't you have to make do with the gears.

[machin]

Ringo: Really? you're still not convinced by your own graph? Please plot only top gear, but make sure you take the revs right down to 0rpm (you've started at 1000rpm).... you'll see it looks exatly like the graph you've just posted.... no need for the lower gears.

With the corret final drive ratio the car will do 200mph at 12,000rpm (assuming it is sufficiently aerodynamic!).

[ringo]

It wont look the same, the wheel forces will be much lower.

The 7th start is behind the first obviously, but you car doesn't idle at zero does it?
This will kill the arguement once and for all.

Example: each of us are given a American muscle car, redlines at 8,000rpm but peak power is made at 6000.
If i launch my car in first gear at peak power, and you launch you car in yours with your single high speed gear at full power, who's going to outrun who?

Who has the most acceleration?

You lose which ever single gear ratio you chose to put into your car.
You either don't accelerate fast enough or if you do, you don't have my top speed when i change into 2,3,4,5,6,7.

It can't get any clearer than that. If you want to launch with my multispeed gear box, and keep up with my topspeed, your engine need to rev to 40,000rpm.

[xpensive]

You might lack the basics for this discussion but I give it one more try, if you have an engine which gives constant power along its rev range, what you do is to set its single gear for the engine's peak rpm to be at the car's terminal speed.

Simple really, in a perfect world, which was the subject to begin with.

[ringo]

You might lack the basics for this discussion but I give it one more try, if you have an engine which gives constant power along its rev range, what you do is to set its single gear for the engine's peak rpm to be at the car's terminal speed.

Simple really, in a perfect world, which was the subject to begin with.

exactly! Now what does one chose, a torquey (high accel.) gear with 40,000rpm engine, or weak gear (low accel) with 7000 rpm.

[machin]

Xpensive: Shall we give up here?!

Ringo: we were talking about a constant power engine that can produce full power from 0 to 12000rpm. If you want to change the discussion and talk about an engine which has a limited range over which it makes full power, then fine; I always said that in this case a number of different ratios will improve acceleration.

[ringo]

Xpensive: Shall we give up here?!

Ringo: we were talking about a constant power engine that can produce full power right across its rev range. If you want to change the discussion and talk about an engine which has a limited range over which it makes full power, then fine; I always said that in this case a number of different ratios will impove acceleration.

No!!!!
. The power is constant.

Ok, ok, This is the curtain call. ...... gimme a sec.

[machin]

It wont look the same, the wheel forces will be much lower.

Really? Plot it; your 7th gear, right down to 0rpm. Set my mind at rest.

[ringo]

It wont look the same, the wheel forces will be much lower.

Really? Plot it; your 7th gear, right down to 0rpm. Set my mind at rest.

force is smaller by a factor of 4.8, the same as the gear ratio factor.

[machin]

I said right down to 0 rpm. Try again.

(make it 0.05 rpm as we an't be here all day while the computer counts to infinite!). You also might want to limit the Y-axis on your graph before you do it).

[ringo]

I can't do that, reason being for a constant power engine, the torque will be infinity at zero speed.

Force x distance = Power/angular speed.
if angular speed = zero, then you are dividing by zero. That's a no no.

I chose 1,000rpm as the start. If i chose even 300, the trend will be the same.The lower gear will have more force always by a factor of the gear ratio.

[machin]

Oh, OK, so you're changing the discussion and not talking about a constant power machine. Fine. Yes. You'll get more performance with more gears.

For everyone interested in constant power machine debate; you can't get more performance from a constant power machine by adding more gears.

[xpensive]

I can't do that, reason being for a constant power engine, the torque will be infinity at zero speed.
...

Oh gosh, is that why cars have wheel spin perhaps?

[machin]

Hang on:- Even if you limit constant power down to 1000rpm, you won't add anything by adding gears: Imagine you have a 640kg car with 60% weight over the rear wheels and no downforce. With a coefficient of friction of say 2 (big sticky slick tyres), thats a maximum force that can be transmitted of 7534 N (assuming the c of g is at road level!)...

You can see in the graph below that the engine already produces more than enough force at the tyres (in fact it is traction-limited right up to 60m/s!) So adding any more gears is pointless; you won't increase the performance.

You might aswell lengthen the ratio and slip the clutch at the start.

[ringo]

I can't do that, reason being for a constant power engine, the torque will be infinity at zero speed.
...

Oh gosh, is that why cars have wheel spin perhaps?

Maybe, and it's a good thing the torque is not infinite.

I never really thought of it, but i think it breaks the laws of nature to have zero movement, but yet express power. Power is an ability framed in time, so for something that has zero ability, or framed in zero time, yet have power, is paradox.
That might be going over into the hadron collider teritory. I don't even want to think too hard about it.
A perfectly constant power engine is theoretical, It can only be constant at any time > zero. It's like the tangent of 90 degrees, or saying that efficiency cant be 100%