2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[chip engineer]

...
Here you have a typical power curve, where following a power peak, it tails off. Why is that? Well simply put, with the incremental RPM there isn't equal incremental air going into the combustion chambers to make the power go up.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-mKvX ... +curve.png
Why is it not going in? Well something is preventing it I guess and choked flow is one of the key factors.
...

The air is not going in because there is not enough pressure differential to give enough airflow in a NA engine at that rpm.

I must respectfully say that "you ain't right" on this one . When the flow is "choked" you can not bring any additional flow thru pressure differential increase. It is STUCK! at the level it is.

What would "uncork it"? Cam change, YES YES YES. Now you may ponder the question what does cam change do?

Using airflow limits in NA engine to make a point about a boosted engine makes no sense.

Rest assured, that I am not a pioneer in using analogies drawn from one area of science to explain others. In this case, the NA analogy with Turbo is quite nearly identical if you understand the subject. If my argument makes little sense to you, then you should review in detail the information I provided along until you understand it. What I share here with you is something that was never given to me on a platter. You are getting the gist and are not liking it.

Also, with the fuel flow limit, there is no air flow increase needed at high rpm.

Since when??? Are you inventing new principles of Otto cycle engine operation? Maybe you can provide some citations from technical literature to support this.

Although some measure of charge stratification is possible with direct fuel injection, however what you are expecting isn't supported by any thermodynamic principles.

Now that you seem to accept what everyone has been telling you: that with a fuel flow limit, there is no air flow increase needed at high rpm, should we expect an apology for some of your insulting remarks about our knowledge?

[321apex]

Now that you seem to accept what everyone has been telling you: that with a fuel flow limit, there is no air flow increase needed at high rpm, should we expect an apology for some of your insulting remarks about our knowledge?

Nice try in eristical art form.
Did you read what I had written?

[ringo]

The boost requirements reduce as the rpm increases.
The engine speed is increasing the volume flow rate of air. To maintain a steady mass flow rate, the density has to be reduced, hence the reduction in boost pressure.
As for waste gate, they are on the car and will be operation. Things aren't as simple as logic suggests. If there is any sudden change in mass flow because of a sudden change in external load, then the waste gate can open.
There are infinitely variable things that can happen on the track in terms of load on the power unit.

Months ago it was thought there would be none because of increased weight and packaging. Now that they're on the cars the argument now is that they are there for nothing. haha.

[Ferraripilot]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong with this, but regarding customer supplied engines, it's my understanding teams are supplied with a basic engine map and then each team individually programs their own more advanced/detailed maps. Can anyone comment on this?

[321apex]

apex you need to remember that from 10500 rpm to 15000 the airflow through the engine will be the same. But from 10500 rpm and upwards the engine itselfs sustains more and more of the airflow which means that the turbo is suppling less and less boost. The flow and energy through the exhaust should stay the same. Though the exhaust gasses would travel faster, slightly decreasing the pressure which is why you dont need to wastegate it.

If you think that these new engines should rev to 15k then you must have a good reason for it. What is it?
Is it simply that because they can, so they should or must?

[321apex]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong with this, but regarding customer supplied engines, it's my understanding teams are supplied with a basic engine map and then each team individually programs their own more advanced/detailed maps. Can anyone comment on this?

Inlet air ducting (intercooler design) has an effect on the equivalence ratio on the track. So the base map is generated by the engine supplier, however each team has an engineer/s assigned to fine tune the mapping issues. This also underestimates any impact the MGU-x is going to have on "electronic wrench" tuning requirement.

[WhiteBlue]

The boost requirements reduce as the rpm increases.
The engine speed is increasing the volume flow rate of air. To maintain a steady mass flow rate, the density has to be reduced, hence the reduction in boost pressure.
As for waste gate, they are on the car and will be operation. Things aren't as simple as logic suggests. If there is any sudden change in mass flow because of a sudden change in external load, then the waste gate can open.
There are infinitely variable things that can happen on the track in terms of load on the power unit.

Months ago it was thought there would be none because of increased weight and packaging. Now that they're on the cars the argument now is that they are there for nothing. haha.

Nothing has changed with regard to waste gates in the last 24 months. We only received conformation by the manufacturers that our assumptions were correct. In order to maximize fuel efficiency you must not use the waste gate. They are safety devices only. The moment your engine goes out of the control windows of the multiple control loops that are run for the engine and turbo you have lost the game. So all depends of a successful control strategy that avoids unforseen dynamic states of the power unit that could call for waste gate activation.

[mrluke]

The boost requirements reduce as the rpm increases.
The engine speed is increasing the volume flow rate of air. To maintain a steady mass flow rate, the density has to be reduced, hence the reduction in boost pressure.
As for waste gate, they are on the car and will be operation. Things aren't as simple as logic suggests. If there is any sudden change in mass flow because of a sudden change in external load, then the waste gate can open.
There are infinitely variable things that can happen on the track in terms of load on the power unit.

Months ago it was thought there would be none because of increased weight and packaging. Now that they're on the cars the argument now is that they are there for nothing. haha.

Nothing has changed with regard to waste gates in the last 24 months. We only received conformation by the manufacturers that our assumptions were correct. In order to maximize fuel efficiency you must not use the waste gate. They are safety devices only. The moment your engine goes out of the control windows of the multiple control loops that are run for the engine and turbo you have lost the game. So all depends of a successful control strategy that avoids unforseen dynamic states of the power unit that could call for waste gate activation.

With such a high cost on a PU failure, it would be foolish not to have a wastegate. You may be able to resolve the issue for the next race, but thats not much good if you dont have enough PUs left to finish the season.

[chip engineer]

Many here have said that the F1 exhaust gas energy recovery has no relevance to road cars, but it looks like some are at least trying to use it for road cars:
http://papers.sae.org/2014-01-1873/ From the abstract:
"An attractive solution to efficiently meeting the electrical power requirement during every day driving whilst at the same time being able to demonstrate a reduction in fuel consumption and CO2 across legislative drive cycles, is to generate a significant proportion of the electrical energy from the exhaust gas. One method of harvesting energy from the exhaust is to incorporate the use of a generator system, in which a high-speed radial-flow turbine is placed in the exhaust gas flow. The turbine is coupled directly to a high-speed generator. This paper describes the design and development steps taken to realize a functioning Turbo-generator Integrated Gas Energy Recovery System (TIGERS®). The electrical machine design and control system for this application is particularly challenging for a number of reasons. The turbine is capable of rotating the shaft at speeds greater than its critical rotating limit which is 60,000rpm."

Additional (non-paywalled) info here:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/02 ... 8-cpt.html

[pgfpro]

My thoughts on running no waste-gate.

If the MGUH has issues and slows down or even stops the turbine wheel from spinning there will be no damage to the engine. The turbine wheel is connected to the compressor wheel. Slowing the turbine wheel down lowers the boost or even makes no boost at all and the power falls off drastically. I have had this happen on my own car. The turbo stop spinning due to a trash thrust plate from me running with out a waste-gate going for a specific turbo record. The turbo lasted two years but finally gave out from the abuse. lol In F1 if this happen the car would have a major power loss and they would bring it in, race is over for them.

Now the other way... most engine management systems have a over boost parameter. If the MGUH is no longer working to control turbo wheel speed and or boost, and the turbo has no waste-gate, the engine management system will have a preset boost limit. This is called "boost-cut"
"Boost-Cut" will operate by "ignition cut" or "fuel cut". This will keep the engine from over boosting and going extremely lean (F1 fuel limit rule )and detonating. It will also save the turbo from over spinning and killing itself.

You can even build your own boost cut parameter if your engine management systems doesn't have one with the fuel table and ignition table.

[wuzak]

Porsche's Le Mans car has a turbo and a free power turbine to drive an MGU-H type recovery device.

Obviously not legal for F1, but I wonder if it is more or less efficient.

Control should be simpler too, with the turbo acting normally with the wastegate directing the exhaust to the power turbine. No assistance spooling the turbo, though.

[tuj]

The ECU likely has a mapping of 'boost targets' versus load or torque demand and rpm. The ECU will use the MGU-H and/or the electronically actuated waste-gate to reduce boost if it is over target, and the ECU will use the MGU-H and/or retard spark if boost is below target. The hardest part of all this is building for fast response and anticipating the inertia of the turbine so you end up with a drivable engine.

As for where the engine will rev from and to in rpm-terms during the normal race operation, well, let's wait until we see on-board telemetry from the first practice sessions and qualifying. My best guess is that they will be rev'ing to 13k-15k red-lines, which would put peak power probably somewhere north of 10.5k.

[Holm86]

Months ago it was thought there would be none because of increased weight and packaging. Now that they're on the cars the argument now is that they are there for nothing. haha.

Were you not among those who didn't believe that the boost could be controlled by the MGU-H?? Which is now confirmed. I believed that wastegates would be installed. But only for security reasons. I still don't believe they are necessary for operating the PU's under normal conditions.

[Tommy Cookers]

BMEP=IMEP-FMEP
BMEP -> torque at the crank
IMEP -> mechanical potential from combustion
FMEP -> all frictional losses, pumping, mechanical
The higher the engine speed with limited fuel, the higher are the friction losses (FMEP)... and LESS brake POWER. So ideal power peak is at 10500 RPM, however you must factor in the RPM spread for the gearing, which will force you to rev the engine in a zone of DIMINISHING FUEL efficiency [BSFC].
Engine speed of 15k RPM is the worst possible option. IMHO
Think about this:
- Will an engine make more power at 11k or at 10k?
- How much less power will you make at 15k vs 11k? What will be your BSFC at 15k?

whilst I agree that the engine will not work well over the whole 10500-15000 rpm range (I said so 18 months ago) ...
the friction losses will rise slower with increased rpm than the supercharging work will fall
12500-14500 rpm running could work very well in 2014 (partly because fuel is still freely available at rpm below this (to 10500)
but has no future as it's not compatible with backpressure operation of the turbine
which will be needed when fuel allocation is reduced in the future
btw your Raijput doesn't understand the Wright Turbo-Compound, or more importantly, the magneto

I disagree that fuel is "freely available" since you pay the weight penalty of carrying it on board. Just imagine, that you could have 10% lower average BSFC per lap, which means you could start a race with 90 kg of fuel, saving up to 10 kg in vehicle mass over at least some early portion of a race distance.
The "free " turbine work you are hoping to harness IS NOT FREE, it still comes from the fuel tank. If you want to energize MGU-H, you must burn fuel.... and rather inefficiently at that. Conventional, easy ways to spool up turbos is to retard spark timing. But while doing that you increase thermal load on the engine/cooling system and your BSFC takes a hit.
Running engine should not be viewed as an MGU-H propulsion system. MGU-H is of nice benefit as a by-product to reclaim what would be lost in hot exhaust. But compromising engine performance to gain in MGU-H is bunk engineering and a dead end street.
IMHO of course

no item in your apparent refutation of my post has anything to do with any item in my post
and you seem to think that 2014 F1 is a bsfc competition, not a race limited by fuel quantity
in races limited by fuel quantity it is best to use all the fuel (unless eg using Methanol)
(2014 is not like NA F1 where the power gains from liberal fuel use were small relative to the extra fuel weight)
the problem is how to do it within the mapping rules, some races being dominated by fuel rate, some by fuel quantity

if people fill with 90 kg of fuel, please feel free to tell me about it
they will surely use a 100 kg fill at most races

the NACA showed that backpressure running is not bunk, it increases bsfc and so increases combined power when fuel-limited
provided the exhaust valve closure is matched to the BP and so is able to isolate the piston from the BP
if fuel was reduced as the FIA has suggested in the past BP would be increased even with the existing mgu-k power limit

[Abarth]

[....]I believed that wastegates would be installed. But only for security reasons. I still don't believe they are necessary for operating the PU's under normal conditions.

I agree.
Critical condition could arise if the load of the MGU-H is suddenly lost at high engine load and speed.
Could happen eg if a connection to ES or MGU-K opens (be it cabling / connectors or the power electronics).