2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[WhiteBlue]

There is many on youtube. That cosworth video doesnt show much of the engine's sound unfortunately
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czw1pB6ZDRM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NSRSlHwXhI
...It's extremely close to the reality; to the sound we hear on the onboard cameras for example, even with all those dyno equipements...

There are several comment I would have to make.
1. You agree with me that the audio of the dyno test I posted sounds dull. That is because the exhaust sound is piped outside the dyno room by closed plumbing.
2. If you pay attention to the first video that you posted you can realize that the exhaust pipes are acoustically open to the dyno room and the smokes are sucked out by much bigger pipes.



That way the sound gets recorded without damping and the exhaust gas is largely kept out of the room. Naturally that sound much more lively. You would only use such an arrangement if you are concerned with the PR impact of the sound. All dynos I have ever seen in my life had the closed arrangement.

[ringo]

The v6 can never sound like a v8, worse if it's turbo charged and doubly worse which such a low horse power.
I figured the turbo would muffle most of the sound and that the cars wont sound any better than the old turbo v6s of the 80's.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VF3yEFbGpcs[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzCSLu1xDn4[/youtube]

There's something else i was thinking about the other day. To increase efficiency i feel these engines will be purposely built to run at higher coolant and lubricant temperatures. the lubes and coolants will be designed to be optimum at elevated temperatures.
When this happens, there is a reduction in temperature delta across the heat exchangers and this will allow for less heat loss.
The same goes for in cycliner temperatures. If there is a hotter coolant temperature, the temperature gradient across the cylinder to coolant channel will be milder, and thus the heat transfer from cylinder to coolant will be less.
So it benefits both thermal and aerodynamic efficiency to have a hotter engine.
The special in cylinder coatings and bearing coatings will also be a big factor in engine efficiency.

[Holm86]

The v6 can never sound like a v8, worse if it's turbo charged and doubly worse which such a low horse power.
I figured the turbo would muffle most of the sound and that the cars wont sound any better than the old turbo v6s of the 80's.

I don't think those V6's in the two clips sound bad. To me they sound pretty good.
But the new engines wont sound like that. They will be similar en frequency but that's it. The sound is a byproduct and a waste of energy. As engines become more efficient they will be quieter and also run much smoother. Some of the charm of the old engines was the popping and crackling exhaust which is caused by unburned fuel. That wont happen in the new engines.

There's something else i was thinking about the other day. To increase efficiency i feel these engines will be purposely built to run at higher coolant and lubricant temperatures. the lubes and coolants will be designed to be optimum at elevated temperatures.
When this happens, there is a reduction in temperature delta across the heat exchangers and this will allow for less heat loss.
The same goes for in cycliner temperatures. If there is a hotter coolant temperature, the temperature gradient across the cylinder to coolant channel will be milder, and thus the heat transfer from cylinder to coolant will be less.
So it benefits both thermal and aerodynamic efficiency to have a hotter engine.
The special in cylinder coatings and bearing coatings will also be a big factor in engine efficiency.

It is somewhat confirmed that engines will run hotter. Watch this clip if you haven't already :
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKhu42yWLXY[/youtube]

And I've just started talking about coatings in the "2014 engines: do they sound right" thread. I also believe that coatings will be a big factor.

EDIT : Adding the quote from the other thread.

And I think its pointless discussing if that's the real intercooler or not. As the teams will surely design those themselves. Just as the radiators.

And when it comes to the size of the intercoolers I think they will be large. At least taking up one entire sidepod.

Some people say that the cooling requirements of the new IC engine itself will be lower than current V8's. That seems to be true as the total output of the new engines are lower than today. But the ERS system will require even more cooling than today. So the total engine cooling requirements adds up to something almost like today. But then again in 2014 we have ERS-H which is harvesting some energy from heat. This removes a bit of cooling requirements as this heat is converted into energy. Though that is not much. So radiators should be somewhat the same as today size wise. But as they discuss in the Racers edge video in the engine thread they are looking at running the engines hotter which means smaller radiators.

There is also an aspect we haven't really discussed much. Which is coatings on pistons and cylinder sidewalls.

The standard low friction coatings on the sidewalls and piston sides is a given I believe. But I also believe that the top of the pistons will be coated with thermal barrier coatings. And even the entire combustion chamber would be coated with these. This will reduce the heat transfer to the engine block and cylinder heads. Which also decreases the heating requirements of the engine. This also means that the exhaust gasses will be even hotter. Bringing more energy for the turbine. And again you can reduce the size of the radiators.

So this became a little of a long story. But my point is that the intercoolers will take up one of the sidepods. And the radiator the other. Perhaps ERS cooling could be in the same sidepod as the intercooler but behind it.

[timbo]

Wrote a post on pitch in the engine-sound thread http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 35#p446235

[WhiteBlue]

...But my point is that the intercoolers will take up one of the sidepods. And the radiator the other. Perhaps ERS cooling could be in the same sidepod as the intercooler but behind it.

For me the conclusion was that inter cooler capacity will need to be much bigger than the radiator capacity since it uses air to air compared to water to air in the case of the ICE radiator. My conclusion is that the inter cooler will have one total side pot and everything else will go into the other side pot, at least that would appear to follow some logic to me.

I have also asked myself if an intermediate fluid circuit making it air to water to air would make any sense. You would have an additional heat transfer and additional weight but heat transfer could be much bigger and it may be a net saving of space.

[timbo]

Would they need a big intercooler (or any intercooler at all) having oversized turbo and limited fuel flow?
If you have stoichiometric mixture you only need to force as much air is needed into cylinder, and you can always raise density of air by increasing the turbo pressure as much as you need.

[xpensive]

Would they need a big intercooler (or any intercooler at all) having oversized turbo and limited fuel flow?
If you have stoichiometric mixture you only need to force as much air is needed into cylinder, and you can always raise density of air by increasing the turbo pressure as much as you need.

That was my initial position as well, the way aerodynamics rules F1, I think there will be some compact air-water-air device,
certainly not anything like that monstrous Renault-contraption we have been presented?

[Tommy Cookers]

I don't know why you keep categorizing the MGUH as a load
the existence or non-existence of this conceptual load will be determined by actual MGUH behaviour in use

If it's a boost controller, it's a load. It would be using turbine energy would it not?

the MGUH will be the sharp end of a velocity-controlled 'servo' system
that will continuously (ie progressively and powerfully) control the ''turbo' rpm to be always matched to the engine's needs
this matching is crucial and must be dominant by design
the rpm being ideal for the engine, the only MGUH loading of the engine is exactly what the engine 'wants' to do its designed job

There is a very huge difference with a turbo characteristic and a dc motor characteristic, assuming they are using dc motors. have a look at a dc motor torque vs speed graph. trust me it's not going to be something very easy to do with a gasoline turbo engine.

the 'turbo rpm' demand will be continuously generated ie appropriately time-varied by part-intelligent control
this appropriate time-variation of rpm constitutes the matching of 'turbo rpm' to the engines time-varying needs and capabilities

The turbo doesn't have a demand, it's the MGUH that does. the only demand you will see on the turbo is when it's off boost.
The turbo is the power source.

and the MGUHs essential job is to be the mechanism performing this match (and generate electricity only when appropriate)

It's job is to be a load. And that's all it will do. It's either a load on the turbo, or a load on the battery or energy store when it's spooling the turbo.

seamless and progressively proportionate transition from motoring to generation is what makes a servo-type control system

let's see, but you are only looking on it from a servo side of things. you are not looking on the other half, the half with the power.

of course the rpm control could fail to match rpm eg if there is insufficient or excess stored electrical energy
that sort of thing is an issue in what must be a subordinate area of design, it does not invalidate the concept
there's nothing that's 'not to like' about the MGUH control concept, under these rules
these rules were designed by people who knew what they were doing, and knew what they wanted

All of that resource and investment in research when you only need to put a waste gate on the turbo. In fact that would make the MGUH even more easy to control and give it smoother operation.
What goes through the waste gate, you get it back under braking, simple as that. haha.We're talking a far more responsive engine, to get higher top speeds and better more predictable drivability, for a few drops of fuel. Get it back under braking, the ES will be full most of the time anyway.

I think that you are saying that because boost regulation by MGUH operation as an rpm-controlled 'servo' system accurately responding to a continously varying signal and driving to the turbo rpm ideal for the ICE at that moment is difficult
...... it is both undesirable and impossible

it is clearly desirable to the rulemakers

I think that it is possible
there is no problem with the 'motor' torque curve
any motor type selected for this will have torque always proportionate to the current made available by the drive (amplifier)
this current will always be proportionate to the 'error' signal that is developed by summing of inputs to the amplifier
these will be the demand (+) signal representing the required rpm and (-) feedback signal(s) ie actual rpm and possibly others
the result of summing is a tiny signal representing the difference between the actual rpm and the required rpm
this tiny voltage signal is amplified eg at 30000 Amp/Volt to change the applied current, hence MGUH torque and rpm - continuously

so the motor torque curve obtained if some fixed and arbitrary 'voltage' eg 48V was applied is irrelevant and misleading

the turbo characteristic is not an issue, its just treatable as velocity-related and acceleration-related loads
my guess is that the system could have a bandwidth of maybe 2-3 Hz
so could sweep sinusoidally 0-100000-0 rpm accurately at 1 Hz (and could play tunes such as Renault demonstrated with F1 engines)
so is suitable for most F1 running
of course it can only be as good as the determination of the correct turbo rpm for every moment of competitive ICE running
one would expect also to use eg feedback from pressure sensing

with the fixed fuel rate rules there is less need for boost regulation by wastegate
so regulation by suitably controlled MGUH action must be easier than it would have been in the past

it's 70 years since NACA showed recovery turbines could give 25% more engine efficiency without loss of (combined) power
(but during and after WW2 the customer always preferred to have more combined power without loss of efficiency)
so IMO we're not talking about 'a few drops of fuel'
significant wastegating during recovery would only be helpful if the (electric) recovery was not properly controlled electrically

[timbo]

certainly not anything like that monstrous Renault-contraption we have been presented?

It's clearly all (photos, sounds) smoke-and-mirrors at this stage.

[xpensive]

certainly not anything like that monstrous Renault-contraption we have been presented?

It's clearly all (photos, sounds) smoke-and-mirrors at this stage.

I would say that the same goes for statements from, and interviews with, various representatives for the manufacturers.

Even those published in the specialized press.

[WhiteBlue]

There is a very huge difference with a turbo characteristic and a dc motor characteristic, assuming they are using dc motors. have a look at a dc motor torque vs speed graph. trust me it's not going to be something very easy to do with a gasoline turbo engine..

The MGUs will be AC servo technology. Water cooled, permanent magnet, self induced design as they are generally being in use in the automotive and machine tool industry. The only thing DC is the power link between MGUs and the energy storage. Each MGU will be driven by very powerful semi conductor based inverters that do AC/DC and DC/AC depending on the mode of operation. The induction dynamics will be ultra fast and at least a magnitude faster than any mechanical transients in the system. There will be very sensitive rpm feedback in order to enable the induction control. But there will also be a bunch of other cascaded sensors and loop controllers involved to drive the combination of the MGU and the ICE.

[Tommy Cookers]

There is a very huge difference with a turbo characteristic and a dc motor characteristic, assuming they are using dc motors. have a look at a dc motor torque vs speed graph. trust me it's not going to be something very easy to do with a gasoline turbo engine..

The MGUs will be AC servo technology. Water cooled, permanent magnet, self induced design as they are generally being in use in the automotive and machine tool industry. The only thing DC is the power link between MGUs and the energy storage. Each MGU will be driven by very powerful semi conductor based inverters that do AC/DC and DC/AC depending on the mode of operation. The induction dynamics will be ultra fast and at least a magnitude faster than any mechanical transients in the system. There will be very sensitive rpm feedback in order to enable the induction control. But there will also be a bunch of other cascaded sensors and loop controllers involved to drive the combination of the MGU and the ICE.

I did not say this, Ringo did !!
again you have accidently or otherwise manipulated the thing that you chose to 'quote'

[WhiteBlue]

Sorry for the mistake TC. It was by no means intentional. I'll fix it in the original post and we can delete these two posts if you like.

[chip engineer]

...But my point is that the intercoolers will take up one of the sidepods. And the radiator the other. Perhaps ERS cooling could be in the same sidepod as the intercooler but behind it.

For me the conclusion was that inter cooler capacity will need to be much bigger than the radiator capacity since it uses air to air compared to water to air in the case of the ICE radiator. My conclusion is that the inter cooler will have one total side pot and everything else will go into the other side pot, at least that would appear to follow some logic to me.

I have also asked myself if an intermediate fluid circuit making it air to water to air would make any sense. You would have an additional heat transfer and additional weight but heat transfer could be much bigger and it may be a net saving of space.

Maybe a small light weight air to water intercooler right after the turbo followed in series with a moderate sized air to air would make sense.

[wuzak]

There is a very huge difference with a turbo characteristic and a dc motor characteristic, assuming they are using dc motors. have a look at a dc motor torque vs speed graph. trust me it's not going to be something very easy to do with a gasoline turbo engine..

The MGUs will be AC servo technology. Water cooled, permanent magnet, self induced design as they are generally being in use in the automotive and machine tool industry. The only thing DC is the power link between MGUs and the energy storage. Each MGU will be driven by very powerful semi conductor based inverters that do AC/DC and DC/AC depending on the mode of operation. The induction dynamics will be ultra fast and at least a magnitude faster than any mechanical transients in the system. There will be very sensitive rpm feedback in order to enable the induction control. But there will also be a bunch of other cascaded sensors and loop controllers involved to drive the combination of the MGU and the ICE.

I was under the impression that AC motor/generators did not use permanent magnets.

The fact that you refer to it being a "self induced" design would seem to indicate that you concur. If there are magnets there is no need for induction (passing a current through one part to create a current to generate a magnetic field).