2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[tuj]

I heard statements from the teams that they felt like they could get good optimization for all the tracks with 8 gears, with Monaco using only 1-7 and Monza using 2-8.

[rscsr]

Already done. In the transmission thread by me. The exact gearing is almost unimportant as the power curve is pretty flat.

Here's the link: http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 13#p484513

[321apex]

Drivers are talking about the power units already being quite strong which leads me to believe they are in the ballpark of last year's numbers.

The MGU-K is allowed to deliver maximum of 200 NM of torque. When coupled with a turbo engine delivering close to 400 Nm you get a total of 600 Nm to put down to pavement.

I don't know how much torque 2013 KERS was allowed to deliver, but if we compare torque capability in 2013, when the V8 engines were making about 300Nm and assuming KERS was around 150Nm, then you get a total of maybe ~ 450Nm.

So in 2014 this is roughly a 30% torque increase with harder, less grippy tires and less downforce. It may be the year when men are separated from the boys.

[vtr]

As I pointed out, those figures of 220 g/kw-hr include regeneration. Which misses completely our discussion of "piston only" BSFC. My original argument was that the "piston only" power will be seriously limited to not much more than 500HP due to this stingy fuel flow limit.

Well I believe those numbers do not count regeneration, and the engine part of the power unit will produce about 580-600 bhp by itself (say the MGU-K is broken for some reason) but we'll agree to disagree apparently.

Any thoughts on this?

About the transmission, in the "2014 transmissions" thread http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 2&start=30 there is a very good analysis by rscsr, using those Cosworth engine curves. According to that, the 8 gears would be almost unneeded given the flat power band of the 2014 engines (according to the Cosworth graphs once again)

[motobaleno]

I heard statements from the teams that they felt like they could get good optimization for all the tracks with 8 gears, with Monaco using only 1-7 and Monza using 2-8.

I see monaco 1-7 but I don't think monza 2-8...the "prima variante" is one of the slowest chicane of the circus...so I will say monza 1-8....

[langwadt]

Drivers are talking about the power units already being quite strong which leads me to believe they are in the ballpark of last year's numbers.

The MGU-K is allowed to deliver maximum of 200 NM of torque. When coupled with a turbo engine delivering close to 400 Nm you get a total of 600 Nm to put down to pavement.

I don't know how much torque 2013 KERS was allowed to deliver, but if we compare torque capability in 2013, when the V8 engines were making about 300Nm and assuming KERS was around 150Nm, then you get a total of maybe ~ 450Nm.

So in 2014 this is roughly a 30% torque increase with harder, less grippy tires and less downforce. It may be the year when men are separated from the boys.

it is not the engine torque that is important, it is the torque at the wheels

more torque at a lower rpm must be matched with a higher gear so at the wheels it will probably come out about the same

[321apex]

Drivers are talking about the power units already being quite strong which leads me to believe they are in the ballpark of last year's numbers.

The MGU-K is allowed to deliver maximum of 200 NM of torque. When coupled with a turbo engine delivering close to 400 Nm you get a total of 600 Nm to put down to pavement.

I don't know how much torque 2013 KERS was allowed to deliver, but if we compare torque capability in 2013, when the V8 engines were making about 300Nm and assuming KERS was around 150Nm, then you get a total of maybe ~ 450Nm.

So in 2014 this is roughly a 30% torque increase with harder, less grippy tires and less downforce. It may be the year when men are separated from the boys.

it is not the engine torque that is important, it is the torque at the wheels

more torque at a lower rpm must be matched with a higher gear so at the wheels it will probably come out about the same

I would like to respectfully point out to you, that you have not read my post, or at least your comment does not reflect the true content of my post. In it at the beginning I used the following phrase: "....to put down to pavement.", which should have made it quite clear what exactly I meant.

Please read more carefully b4 you post critical remarks.

[wuzak]

The Honda RA168E made 620hp with BSFC of 272g/kWh with fuel that had ~43MJ/kg LHV, @ 12,000rpm.

If we take that back to 600hp, the BSFC required is 263g/kW/hr. Up the LHV to 45MJ/kg and you now require a BSFC of 252g/kW/hr. Now you only need a 5% improvement from friction, DI, materials and design to get to the 240g/kW/hr shown in Cosworth's graphs.

[Tommy Cookers]

The Honda RA168E made 620hp with BSFC of 272g/kWh with fuel that had ~43MJ/kg LHV, @ 12,000rpm.

the 84% Toluene/16% Heptane fuel is AFAIK 41.2 MJ/kg LHV
(Toluene 40.6, Heptane 44.5 MJ/kg LHV)

so 600 hp on 2014 45 MJ/kg fuel would give a bsfc of 241 g/kWh

[321apex]

The Honda RA168E made 620hp with BSFC of 272g/kWh with fuel that had ~43MJ/kg LHV, @ 12,000rpm.

If we take that back to 600hp, the BSFC required is 263g/kW/hr. Up the LHV to 45MJ/kg and you now require a BSFC of 252g/kW/hr. Now you only need a 5% improvement from friction, DI, materials and design to get to the 240g/kW/hr shown in Cosworth's graphs.

You are making a valiant effort.
Please realize that the figure quoted by Honda was attained at equivalence ratio of 1.02, which means just 2% richer from the stoichiometric ratio.
Under those circumstances the engine not only doesn't make it's "best" possible power, but at the same time is running very hot exhaust gas temperatures. In those days, the teams had no limit as to how many engines they use. Often they used as many in a weekend as is now allowed for a whole season.

Exhaust gas temperature is a highly important operational parameter in racing engines, which directly impacts engine life. In this case, when you are trying to run fuel efficient map, you will get high engine temps shortening it's life. Balancing those two will be this year's F1 science.

Back in the 80's, McLaren/Williams would install this fresh RA168 for Sunday and run it in the morning warm-up and the race itself, roughly less than 400 km total. Today we have 19 races with approx 700km per weekend and 5 engines, which works out to be around 2600 km engine life. That is 6-7 times longer life expectancy under comparable stress, which you may not have recognized.

[hollus]

Apex, you are forgetting to add IMHO to most of your posts (IMHO).

Please answer a very simple question: What happens immediately after your driver shifts one gear up while running at 10500 RPM?

[WhiteBlue]

The main thing coming out of the Cosworth curves is confirmation that the PUs will run between 8.000 and 12.000 rpm for all practical purposes. We did know that long before when the dyno sound tracks were published. Nice to have confirmation now. The practical inplications I see are much more to do with combustion in my view. At 500 bar injection it should be possible to fit a single injection event into the cycle and achieve a hollow cone spray with stratification effect. I'm still waiting for some information on combustion methods to come out.

[langwadt]

The MGU-K is allowed to deliver maximum of 200 NM of torque. When coupled with a turbo engine delivering close to 400 Nm you get a total of 600 Nm to put down to pavement.

I don't know how much torque 2013 KERS was allowed to deliver, but if we compare torque capability in 2013, when the V8 engines were making about 300Nm and assuming KERS was around 150Nm, then you get a total of maybe ~ 450Nm.

So in 2014 this is roughly a 30% torque increase with harder, less grippy tires and less downforce. It may be the year when men are separated from the boys.

it is not the engine torque that is important, it is the torque at the wheels

more torque at a lower rpm must be matched with a higher gear so at the wheels it will probably come out about the same

I would like to respectfully point out to you, that you have not read my post, or at least your comment does not reflect the true content of my post. In it at the beginning I used the following phrase: "....to put down to pavement.", which should have made it quite clear what exactly I meant.

Please read more carefully b4 you post critical remarks.

Then I don't get it please explain; one engine makes ~450nm@17000rpm, other ~600nm@11000rpm, to run the same speed they need different gear ratios, so in the end the torque at the wheels is about the same
How is that more at the pavement?

[321apex]

Apex, you are forgetting to add IMHO to most of your posts (IMHO).

Please answer a very simple question: What happens immediately after your driver shifts one gear up while running at 10500 RPM?

Most obviously you wanted to make a point about the RPM drop and it is a good point to make.
I have not (IMHO) ignored that fact while arguing that these new F1 engines will not be running at 15k RPM. So while we consider an average of 2000 RPM drop in engine revs during shift change, we may end up with an operating envelope of lets say 9500-11500 RPM, which is still not much more than 10500 RPM.

But surely we are way off from 15k.
IMHO of course.

[321apex]

Then I don't get it please explain; one engine makes ~450nm@17000rpm, other ~600nm@11000rpm, to run the same speed they need different gear ratios, so in the end the torque at the wheels is about the same
How is that more at the pavement?

The remarks made by drivers concerned exit from corners, when they were accelerating. Usually at that point it is the net force trying to push the car forward that may or may not break the traction and it is torque that does it
Force -> Torque
This is why Pirelli had to make the tires harder, in order to resist those higher magnitude forces, even though the maximum power seemingly was to remain the same.

The 2014 spec has about 30% more torque than in 2013. So this is what the drivers (Massa among them) were describing.
IMHO of course.