2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Holm86]

I don't see that it excludes 1158's idea either.

There can only be one map for dry conditions and one for wet. (Though this removes the ideas we thought of earlier with special qualification maps I recon??).

But a map uses different sorts of input to regulate ignition, injection and boost (if boost is electrically regulated).
One of those inputs could be from the gearbox. This means that § 5.5.4 is fulfilled as the torque is monotonically increased with increase in throttle position. The torque is just lower in the first gears.

And this also fulfills § 5.5.3 IMO.

So it is not these two paragraphs that inhibits running lower boost in lower gears the way I see it.

[1158]

I don't see that it excludes 1158's idea either.

There can only be one map for dry conditions and one for wet. (Though this removes the ideas we thought of earlier with special qualification maps I recon??).

But a map uses different sorts of input to regulate ignition, injection and boost (if boost is electrically regulated).
One of those inputs could be from the gearbox. This means that § 5.5.4 is fulfilled as the torque is monotonically increased with increase in throttle position. The torque is just lower in the first gears.

And this also fulfills § 5.5.3 IMO.

So it is not these two paragraphs that inhibits running lower boost in lower gears the way I see it.

Lets just say for a second that it would be legal to do this. I have been trying to think of a way to limit boost in lower gears without using the ECU as the control device, basically cut MES equipment out of the loop.

My question is would it be legal for a team to have electric controls outside of what MES supplies? For instance all that would be needed is a signal from the transmission indicating gear selection and a signal from a pressure transducer. These signals would go to the "controller" which would then operate a solenoid which could open and close a valve to regulate boost. A wastegate would be the obvious choice here but I'm still trying to come to grips with will there be a WG? I think there will be (I don't see how it cannot be present) but F1 engineers are a lot smarter than I am so I am not ruling out a solution without a WG.

[WhiteBlue]

No. You can do pretty much nothing on electronic controls without MES and the FiA. You can adjust profiles. You can fill out pre designed maps. You can set pre defined parameters. You are not allowed any programming at all unless it passes the scrutiny of MES and FiA. You cannot change anything in hardware design, either sensors, connections, protocols, architecture, additional processors, not even a single cable in the wiring loom. The most advanced thing you are now allowed to ad is a couple of digital inputs and outputs for testing purposes in free practise. Anything used in qualifying or a race must be homologated by the FiA. Pretty much water tight.

[1158]

No. You can do pretty much nothing on electronic controls without MES and the FiA. You can adjust profiles. You can fill out pre designed maps. You can set pre defined parameters. You are not allowed any programming at all unless it passes the scrutiny of MES and FiA. You cannot change anything in hardware design, either sensors, connections, protocols, architecture, additional processors, not even a single cable in the wiring loom. The most advanced thing you are now allowed to ad is a couple of digital inputs and outputs for testing purposes in free practise. Anything used in qualifying or a race must be homologated by the FiA. Pretty much water tight.

That was what I thought, I figured teams would not be allowed to add anything extra. Otherwise it would open a huge can of worms. Thanks for the clarification.

I guess there isn't much chance of this happening unless FIA/MES deem it ok and at that point all teams would have it so it would just come down to who could maximize it.

[Holm86]

But the ECU already has a gear signal. As its the ECU who controls the gearshifts right??

[WhiteBlue]

But the ECU already has a gear signal. As its the ECU who controls the gearshifts right??

Sure, but that does not mean the FiA or better the F1 commission will allow such signals to be used in the mapping of the throttle pedal. Whatever we speculate can be right or wrong. We simply do not know.

[WhiteBlue]

... to control boost only with the MGU-H, while sending the harvest directly to the MGU-K, will be a regulating nightmare. Or so I believe

Rob White wrote in Racecar Engineering December 2012:

To me it looks like Renault are implementing a direct link with max MGU-H harvesting. Loading the ES is only minimally done to get juice to spool the turbo up. That strategy cannot work well unless you control the compressor boost by the MGU-H.

[flynfrog]

how do you control boost with a full pack burn it off into a resistor bank or try to drive the motor backwards? On the solar cars I raced we used regenerative braking. There was a noticeable difference in braking as you approached a full pack. Im with X here there will be a wastegate if nothing more than a failsafe.

[WhiteBlue]

The question was already answered. You decouple the MGU-H or you cut the direct injection which is an option every two milliseconds when the next injection is scheduled. So reaction time to a faulty sensor signal or any other emergency shut down signal would be really fast.

[bhall]

A wastegate makes much more sense than needlessly reinventing the wheel here.

[wuzak]

A wastegate makes much more sense than needlessly reinventing the wheel here.

Much more sense?

Really? The MGUH will control the load on the turbo. The more excess power at the turbine, the more energy is extracted and stored/used.

With a wastegate the energy is sent out the exhaust pipe, and never used again.

I can see where a wastegate could be used if the MGUH or its control fails, but then the turbo would have very bad lag owing to the mismatch of the turbine and compressor. In other words, if the MGUH or its control fails, you're up a certain creek without a paddle.

[flynfrog]

The question was already answered. You decouple the MGU-H or you cut the direct injection which is an option every two milliseconds when the next injection is scheduled. So reaction time to a faulty sensor signal or any other emergency shut down signal would be really fast.

how does decoupling the MGU-H keep the turbo from overspeeding/overboosting

[wuzak]

The question was already answered. You decouple the MGU-H or you cut the direct injection which is an option every two milliseconds when the next injection is scheduled. So reaction time to a faulty sensor signal or any other emergency shut down signal would be really fast.

how does decoupling the MGU-H keep the turbo from overspeeding/overboosting

It doesn't.

But decoupling the MGUH takes the load off the turbo when the turbine power is matched to the compressor power.

[flynfrog]

and that eliminates the need for a wastegate how?

[pgfpro]

Some thoughts I have on the use of a waste-gate or not.

The number one reason F1 is building a turbo charge engine with a MGUH unit is to use all the energy they can from the turbine. Part of the energy is going to be used to drive the compressor so they can't do much about that other then make the turbo as efficient as possible. Now to extract as much energy as they can from the turbine they will have to run a larger then normal turbine housing and turbine wheel. This gives them more flow through the turbine and less through the waste-gate.

So were talking a very small percent that will be waste-gated (or none) and dumped. Also all the releases they have shown, do show a very large turbine for just a little 1.6L that will make its living around 10500 rpm.

If you enter some values into BG Match Bot and play with the larger turbine sizes you will see for yourselves there really isn't any extra exhaust flow to dump out the waste-gate. Also notice the great EMP numbers and delt p running a larger turbine.

Plus play with the rpm range and you will see as rpm increases boost will have to decrease, do to the F1 fuel rule.

So you have the conventional way of decreasing boost open the gate and lose valuable exhaust energy or you can load the turbine via. MGUH and this will move the plot more to the right on the phi curve where it needs to be because of the larger turbine being used. The conventional way using a waste-gate will keep about where its at on the phi plot during lower rpm and higher boost and higher rpm and lower boost.

Here's a preset value 2014 F1engine that I did so you don't have to enter engine size and fuel limit (220lbs/hr) Use the 10500 rpm column(plot 6). Keep mind the first one is a normal turbine size that i used as a starting point. Then go much larger from there.
Edit: Here's a second link that I think will be more like the turbine they will be using.

http://www.turbodriven.com//performance ... rsin=92044&


http://www.turbodriven.com//performance ... rsin=92044&