2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[jamsbong]

I just read, no more electric only pitlane. Yes! Can't imagine an F1 car moving without loud noise.

[matt21]

Regarding port injection. Lexus uses this at partial load. Like cruising. It is easier to maintain the correct air fuel ratio within all the volume the mixture with port injection. DI is inherently difficult to distribute mixture evenly

But the uneven distribution at DI is excatly what you want in road cars. You can go leaner overall but you still maintain an flamable ratio around the spark plug.

Another idea is that you can provide more fuel at high revs.
Back in the 90´s renault for example had two injectors per cylinder.

[Bredd]

In hat FIA release it says there are new rules on the engine to curb development on certain engine and power train technology but I can't see anywhere where it describes the new technology banned. Anyone know what they have limited or curbed?

[WhiteBlue]

The new version of the technical regulations are not yet published by the FiA. This is not unusual. It usually takes some days for a new version to appear if they decide to publish it. We will have to wait to know what is changed.

[WhiteBlue]

Renault chairman Ghosn is happy with the direction Formula One has taken with 1.6-litre V6 turbos set to replace the current 2.4-litre V8s in 2014.

In 2008 when we made a change of strategy and we said we would become an engine provider. The condition was that Formula One would move towards more environmentally friendly technologies. We didn't say we need electric cars or we need this and that, we just said we will stay and continue to contribute as long as the technology is moving towards being more environmentally friendly. That's what's taking place.

So we have at least one globally operating automotive manufacturer who is happy and continues to publicly support the 2014 formula and the push for green.

[jamsbong]

But the uneven distribution at DI is excatly what you want in road cars. You can go leaner overall but you still maintain an flamable ratio around the spark plug.

Yes, leaner when u dont need the power like during idle. At partial load, it is better to have nice 14:1 ratio and use high gear to keep engine at low rpm.

The port injection can be used at partial throttle. When car is traction limited. Or at pitlane.

I guess all these can be accomplish using DI. Unless the 500bar limits the fuel flow rate, port injection is probably redundant.

[myurr]

I just read, no more electric only pitlane. Yes! Can't imagine an F1 car moving without loud noise.

With his KERS issues this year, how many more retirements would Webber have had if they had kept this rule? He must be breathing a sigh of relief!

[Tommy Cookers]

DI is able to cool the air more effectively though. This is because the air heats up as it is being compressed and the larger temperature difference allows a faster heat transfer. As a result, the engine is more efficient and thus giving u more power.

DI means that the charge is given no evaporative cooling associated with compression by the supercharger (turbocharger)
this means it will require more cooling by the aftercooler/intercooler to minimise the supercharger power
DI avoids the displacement of air by fuel vapour that is characteristic of most port injection

DI cools the charge (more than PI) under compression in the cylinder
presumably this contributes in part to allowing a higher useable CR
(the CR useable with DI is higher (mainly ?) because the fuel has less time at high T&Ps, time is a big factor)
the benefits of in-cylinder cooling occur with some PI and all carbs as their droplet size deters earlier evaporation (and displacement)

[Tommy Cookers]

Depends on how you measure the octane. In America they measure it differently .. 93 US is about the same as 98 EUR.

somewhere on this site there is a reference to a magazine article based on an interview with a Shell person re their fuel formulation for F1
the person said essentially that the fuel had been formulated for best combustion speed, and that the octane no was not important, and well away from the limit
Honda gave a paper saying that their 60s 125cc race motorcycles only needed 65 octane at full power (18000 rpm)

that´s interesting Tommy, from what i understand Octane is a measurement of how well the fuel can withstand temperature and pressure?
if you find anything i´d be happy to read about it, i would never guess they ran that low Octane

the article is Aug 2007 Car & Driver
Mark Gillies talks to Shell Technology Ferrari manager Lisa Lilley .....
(under Features/Mark Gillies)

the fuels for Ferrari in F1 have been 95-102 RON = 90-97 US
they are not 'now' at the upper limit of Octane (102 RON), because very high combustion speed is more useful (to blend for)
so in a MON test (the US choice) Ferrari fuel would test maybe 90 Octane, equivalent to 92-93 Octane roadside in Europe

IIRC the USA uses the Motor method of Octane test (which has a higher induction temp and uses 900 rpm)
the Research method has a lower induction air temp and uses 600 rpm
Europe uses a mean of results from RON and MON tests
F1 uses RON, a test that is over 80 years old

RON and MON give different answers to the basic question (how the fuel under test compares to reference fuel mixes)
I don't think 600 rpm or 900 rpm tests tell us much about what happens at 18000 rpm either
the test engines were designed 80 years ago? (to stand continuous detonation), they won't run fast

[WhiteBlue]

The new version of the 2014 technical regulations are published now. With regard to power train I see a number of changes and confirmations.

http://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/ ... 111212.pdf

1. Injection equipment like pumps and injectors can now be competitively sourced. No more FiA standard equipment.
2. All fuel injection by DI only. No provision for 25% port injection any more.
3. No fluids bypassing the exhaust turbine can be fed back into the exhaust system. I guess that kills waste gates as you cannot exhaust them legally by any other means as the designated exhaust system.
4. Body work for coanda exhausts are prohibited by new rules.
5. Variable length intake trumpets are allowed from 2015
6. Use of refrigerants (latent heat) other than fuel in cooling systems including charge air coolers (inter coolers) is forbidden.
7. Engine torque and both drive shaft torques are permanently monitored by the FiA telemetry system.
8. MGU-H rpm limit 125,000
9. MGU-K rpm limit 50,000, MGU-K torque 200 Nm maximum
10. Energy flow diagram published showing unlimited power flow between MGU-H to MGU-K
11. Idle speed must be below 4,000 rpm
12. External starters are allowed

That's about it I guess.

[FW17]

6. Use of refrigerants (latent heat) other than fuel in cooling systems including charge air coolers (inter coolers) is forbidden.

It means water injection (or such systems) are not allowed not no intercooler

[agip]

11. Idle speed must be below 4,000 rpm
12. External starters are allowed

11. Fuel saving reasons?
12. Will they be able to start the engine on their own using the MGU?

[aussiegman]

3. No fluids bypassing the exhaust turbine can be fed back into the exhaust system. I guess that kills waste gates as you cannot exhaust them legally by any other means as the designated exhaust system.

I'd really question some of your interpretations of the regs (in the link you provided) based on the wording of 5.8.1, 5.8.2, 5.9.1 & 5.10.2 which make clear distinctions between "fluids" and "exhaust gases" and also allow the use of "devices needed for the control of pressure charging systems" and further describe the legal exhaust systems under the collective regulations within 5.8 .

5.8.1 With the exception of incidental leakage through joints (either into or out of the system), all (and only) the fluids entering the compressor inlet must exit from the engine exhaust system.

The wording to me indicates that they are looking at ways to stop the use of water or fuel for charge cooling while allowing for the situation where "fluids" may enter the intake during say wet races or thought other non-conventional mechanisms (pick a corner case scenario).

Water and/or oil may "leak" past the CHRA bearings & seals of the valve stem seals etc and and incidental leakage through "joints" is OK for unburnt fuel/oil that may seep past the exhaust slip joints .

However, my read is basically this is setting down that only "fluids" that come into the system pre-compressor through the compressor inlet orifice are acceptable allowing for rains etc. This wording precludes the use of post compressor fluid inclusion and post exhaust valve fuel inclusion as ALL fluids must pass through the compressor inlet orifice, the compressor and the engine and exit via the exhaust, which leads to 5.10.2.

5.10.2 There may only be one direct injector per cylinder and no injectors are permitted upstream of the intake valves or downstream of the exhaust valves.

This prohibits using an "injector" upstream of the intake valves and downstream of the exhaust valve, but it doesn't stop using another system to introduce fuel or another liquid either upstream or downstream of the intake/exhaust valve. A constant feed or one that isn't regulated through a pulsating solenoid or "injector" would still be allowable without 5.8.1 if you could show that the system did not make use of the what falls under the technical definition of an "injector".

5.8.2 Engine exhaust systems may incorporate no more than two exits, both of which must be rearward facing tailpipes, through which all exhaust gases must pass.

This definitively separates "exhaust gases" from "fluids" and leads to my interpretation of 5.8.1 and 5.10.2 above. A gas is not a fluid under the regulations. It allows two exits which may be one for the turbine gases and one for the wastegate gases. You could merge them and split them again for balance were you looking for a balanced aero effect etc. But there is nothing under "5.8: Exhaust Systems" that precludes merging the wastegate and turbine gases then separating them again into two (2) exits.

5.9.1 With the exception of devices needed for control of pressure charging systems, variable geometry exhaust systems are not permitted. No form of variable geometry turbine (VGT) or variable nozzle turbine (VNT) or any device to adjust the gas throat section at the inlet to the turbine wheel is permitted.

So you can have a wastegate(s) as variable device(s) "needed for control of pressure charging systems". Wastegates are definitely permissible under 5.9.1

6. Use of refrigerants (latent heat) other than fuel in cooling systems including charge air coolers (inter coolers) is forbidden.

So you “can” use an intercooler, just not an air-to-liquid charge cooler. An air-to-air charge cooler would seem legal under the regulations though.

[matt21]

Also they have forbidden the actual high air intakes.

It looks like we´re going to have a look of the cars like in the 80´s

3. No fluids bypassing the exhaust turbine can be fed back into the exhaust system.
4. Body work for coanda exhausts are prohibited by new rules.

Where is this written?

10. Energy flow diagram published showing unlimited power flow between MGU-H to MGU-K

This sounds like turbo-compounding to me.
For this I would like to get as much as energy out of the exhaust gases.
So big turbo with no wastegate (or just as backup) and use of the MGU-H to help the turbo at low revs.

[WhiteBlue]

6. Use of refrigerants (latent heat) other than fuel in cooling systems including charge air coolers (inter coolers) is forbidden.

It means water injection (or such systems) are not allowed not no intercooler

7.6 Cooling systems :
The cooling systems of the power unit, including that of the charge air, must not intentionally make use of the latent heat of vaporisation of any fluid with the exception of fuel for the normal purpose of combustion in the engine as described in Article 5.14.

No I was a bit unclear in the formulation. The regulations prohibit the use of refrigerants other than fuel in all cooling systems. The wording uses the term "latent heat" for refrigerants and I decided to make that clearer. I also meant to say that this ban on refrigerants applies to all liquid carrying cooling systems including the inter coolers which are referred to as charge air coolers.

5.14.2 Other than engine sump breather gases, exhaust gas recirculation, and fuel for the normal purpose of combustion in the engine, the spraying of any substance into the engine intake air is forbidden.

I guess that covers water injection.