2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Arunas]

Formula none, It seems I was thinking the same thing as you. The little sketches I made has the gearbox longitudinal though. Its longitudinal just for the purpose of the diffuser.

+2
This looks very good. We just need very long narrowing carbon bellhousing between engine and transmission with suspension points and probably not only TC on top of it. KERS generator/motor and even batteries can be placed inside. It makes very nice symetrical layout with shortest air piping, good load carrying possibilities. Length of I4 engine will be in region of 550 mm anyway, same as width of current V8. So in terms of possible aerodynamics it looks even better, as our exhaust will be in engine shadow.

[autogyro]

I would design the KERS MGU as part of the geartrain.
This would allow the elimination of the direct engagement clutch, which I would replace with a free spinning flywheel mounted around the gearbox input shaft.
The flywheel would be spun up electricaly for energy storage and electronicaly clutched to the input shaft to apply the stored energy.

The turbo charger would mount over this flywheel and would also electricaly spin up the flywheel with any excess energy above boost needs.
The flywheel would also be used to help keep the turbo compressor at maxinmum where needed and to illiminate turbo lag.

[strad]

[autogyro]

But then I suppose strad has a better idea.

[riff_raff]

With response of turbochargers, the most important thing is exhaust gas velocity into the turbine. Short length exhaust primaries, that maintain high gas velocities, will give the best turbo response. The reason for this is because the turbocharger's turbine is a device that converts exhaust gas momentum into shaft work at the compressor wheel.

[autogyro]

With response of turbochargers, the most important thing is exhaust gas velocity into the turbine. Short length exhaust primaries, that maintain high gas velocities, will give the best turbo response. The reason for this is because the turbocharger's turbine is a device that converts exhaust gas momentum into shaft work at the compressor wheel.

Yes but it is the compressor that causes the lag.

[747heavy]

I know that, according to WB, we should not bother too much with the details, of the possible 2013 KERS solution. , - which goes a bit against the grain of an engineer.
But I think this targets may give an indication of the things to come and the direction in which the FIA/F1 is aiming with future regulations.



As for the "is the ICE dead or at the end of it´s development cycle" debate.
As it looks for the time beeing, it is still the target of futher developments.
Things like LTC and HCCI come to mind.

Summary of the encourgaed direction of R&D, for Hybrid Technology can be found here:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/12 ... 01216.html

[xpensive]

Tad disappointed with that Alfa I4 turbo, when I had the idea it had eight xhaust pipes and two small Avio turbos?

[ringo]

With response of turbochargers, the most important thing is exhaust gas velocity into the turbine. Short length exhaust primaries, that maintain high gas velocities, will give the best turbo response. The reason for this is because the turbocharger's turbine is a device that converts exhaust gas momentum into shaft work at the compressor wheel.

Yes shorter is better, but less bends in the primaries are as well.
Maybe with highly polished internal diameters, longer pipes can be used to keep velocities up. I've seen some long WRC turbo manifolds, maybe the slight reduction in lag doesn't outweigh the benefits of turbo placement?


This is the cosworth engine. The Mistubishi is quite different, the headers are short and tightly curled.

Heat loss is another issue, but i don't think a few inches more of insulated metal will make any noticeable difference in energy going to the turbo.

The old turbo F1 cars seem to have very long headers as well.




the ferrari is different.

[Formula None]

In production turbo engines, you often see a compact turbo manifold with (seemingly) unequal length headers, like what Shaddock posted above. Presumably this is done because the assembly is more compact, and the exhaust manifold design is much simpler and can be accomplished as a cast unit. You never see this on racing turbo engines, they always go for an equal length header arrangement leading into the turbine.

Does the performance requirement necessitate equal length headers or will F1 want to go for a more compact, unequal-length manifold solution?

[strad]

I'm guessing they will want them to flow somewhere in the 280 ft per sec range.
I'm guessing they will want short equal length primaries.
You..me..we are all guessing..F1 comes up with some strange solutions,,but I bet it's done in real world, simple straightforward way,,not some pie in the sky complex method.

[xpensive]

Oh no strad, I'm guessing we'll see something like this; Large, oval cross-section xhausts, all in magical un-equal lengths,
which taper off in area towards the TC, all in order to accellerate the gases to a level just below the speed of sound.

[autogyro]

You talking cross over scavenging x?
They will have to be very careful how the header design effects fuel efficiency.

[strad]

you be trippin again.

[autogyro]

Idealy the headers would be tuned length joining two pairs and then the joined pair into one, to ensure efficient 'pulse' scavenging and smoothest gas flow with minimum back pressure before the turbo intake.
Compromised by packaging and heat retention requirements.