2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Blackout]

Don't yu find what Remi Taffin from Renault says here a bit strange?:
(Google translation)
As far as I understand, he doesnt exclude the possibility that the engins will often rev at 15000rpm

"All engines are below the limit of 15000 revolutions / minute because you need a base to work," says French. "Then you need to change things to introduce more performance."
"If you look at the maximum speed permitted, it is not a secret that no engine is mounted at such a high speed. I think every engine has its own limitations for the moment, and we are not really close to reach the maximum speed at the moment. "
We will have to let the horses by Melbourne yet.
"Yes, we need to check the car in 'Maximum Performance', but it is not as simple as pushing a button. This must be done step by step."

[pgfpro]

Here's what I think will be the new engines outputs.

Based on 206 g/kWhr

[piston]

[...]if above 10k they could run a lean but stratified charge to prevent knock. Supposedly stratified charge engines have been developed with CR's as high as 20:1 running normal petrol. [...]

Usually stratified charge is used to improve part load efficiency.

I do not think it will be possible to improve a given WOT efficiency with stochiometric..lean mixture by using a markedly lean operation, even if you'll be able to increase CR (which will be limited by geometrical issues anyway, as TC alluded to).

Is there any study available?

Best BSFC for homogeneus mixtures is normally achieved with a lambda of 1,05 to 1,10 (depending on the source). Due to the isentropic exponent the thermodynamic efficiency gets better with a more lean mixture. But slower flame propagation is the downside. Additionally you have higher percentage of frictional losses due to less power with the same amount of air. The overall result of these effects is the following diagram (sorry for wiki, but the diagramm is ok):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ideal ... ometry.jpg
The book "Rennwagentechnik" (Racecar technology) shows a similar picture with the best BSFC at lambda 1,10 and the best BMEP at lambda 0,90. Whatever is the best BSFC point probably depends on your engine. But It will normally not be a rich or the stoichiometric mixture

Well, why is stratified charge used for part load? Because you would have to throttle if you want to keep your stoichiometric mixture. But throttling is inefficient. And very lean homogeneous mixtures burn very slow, making it also inefficient (or perhaps it's not possible to run at all because it's to lean). So a stratified mixture helps you to run quite lean (overall) and you don't have to throttle. This makes part load more efficient.
With the new V6 engines they have the problem that fuel flow is limited. So they want to be as effective as possible. But they have the same problem: Homogeneous lean => burns slower. Stratification would be an option to have a faster combustion process, which makes it more efficient than full lean (homogeneus).
And as WhiteBlue already said: There will be stratification at these high engine speeds with DI. And we can be sure that they will have investigated this quite intense.

Personally I'd think they will run their engines lean (1.05 to 1.10). Every drop of fuel counts. Why waste fuel?
Perhaps they do it in some rev range, perhaps just above 10500. Who knows. This also depends on the turbocharger and the strategie with the MGU-H. Perhaps also on combustion or exhaust-gas temperatures?
This new regulation is really tough work for the engineers. I love it. =D>

[Tommy Cookers]

@ tuj
BMW has a smaller bore than recent Ferrari and Cosworth, its smaller valves and longer stroke should allow higher CR than those
(yes, it was me who mentioned BMW)

@ piston
thermodynamic efficiency gets better with a lean mixture as you describe applies to a typical engine ? (to run rich and lean)
not for a 2014 F1 designed never to run significantly rich ? (or significantly lean IMO)

@ everyone
DI is inherently commences with stratification whether the mean mixture is lean, neutral or rich ?
so it is easy to assume a lean mixture situation is being described when it often is not ?
let's remember that a lean mixture in 2014 is likely to involve more compressor work than necessary for the fuel being used ?
granted stratification with a lean mean mixture helps reduce heat loss to coolant
and we won't be throttling in 2014, given (1?), 2, 4, 6 cyl etc running ?

why would anyone want to run over the whole range 10500 - 15000 rpm ?
surely the engine could work better run at and designed for eg 10800-12800, or 11700-13800, or 12500-14700 rpm nominally ?
the CR and boost combination being optimised for the range chosen at the design stage

[Del Boy]

I have only been reading this thread since November so apologies if it has already been covered.

I have a question regarding the electrical system, mainly because there seems to be confusion (on my part at least) regarding the MGUH. It can provide unlimited power for the MGUK directly. It can provide the ES with the missing 2Mj of energy the MGUK can not recover per lap. I think everybody agrees with these statements.

I believe the batteries are Li-Po which individually have an operating range of 3.0 volt min 4.2 volts max so if you put 100 cells in series you get 400 volts. Therefore the MGUH has to produce 300 amps+

Is that possible from such a small generator that fits in the V of the ICE and is being heated to 450 deg C by the turbocharger

[Skippon]

Yes - I doubt the positioning of MGU-H is such that it sees 450C from the turbo in the Vee.

I suspect that the "string" voltage is greater than 400V - more like 800V.
i.e. keep the voltage as high as is consistent with available switching devices as it is current that causes power losses (loss of efficiency).....

[Mr.G]

Mostly the systems are 350V or 700V... So probably 700V in this case.

[Maxion]

According to the technical regulations the maximum voltage allowed in the car is 1 000.

5.12.5 The maximum peak voltage on the car must never exceed 1000V.

[ringo]

sorry if it's beating a dead horse with my power graphs.
But i've done some refinements calculation wise. It's a bit bumpy around the 10,000 to 11,000rpm mark because i didn't include the 10,500rpm point. I just wanted 1,000rpm increments for expedience.
http://i1010.photobucket.com/albums/af2 ... 6138ae.png
The power does drop after the fuel limit peaks. Well according to theory, however the cosworth engine graphs show otherwise.

What i do notice though with my calculations is that reducing the fuel pressure does have positive effects on the power output in some cases. Maybe direct injection is a different case. But yeah, the teams can also manipulate that as well.

You do not believe in 650 bhp from the engine?

Well I'm not so sure. The graph generated is based on the simulation that I've designed since this thread started. There are many considerations to it, and I've varied a few things to try and squeeze out as much power.
Anything is possible still, and I think my simulation has a way of underrating the prediction but the conditions which I have; 15 degree C intake air, 40 degree C intercooled air, 14:1 compression, and a simple mechanical efficiency no greater than 15% loss may be quite rosey and nice compared to what might be experienced in reality.
So 650 is a very big improvement. 700hp I have no doubt is not thermodynamically possible.

[atanatizante]

... The MGUH is unlimited, but at the end of the the day it's the MGUK that puts the power to the wheels. That is limited, so all teams will have a maximum of 160hp added to their engine power. ...

@ringo
I`m trying to figure it out some rules from the above chart so indulge me with these following statements, please :

1. MGU-K can use max. 4MJ/lap which is coming ONLY from the ES - battery - , right?
2. Or in other measure units we could say that MGU-K has a max. power of 120KW that could be used for max.33,3 sec over a lap, right?
3. Also from the graph we see that MGU-H can provide the ES with the missing 2MJ of energy the MGU-K can`t recover per lap, right?
4. In addition, MGU-H can provide unlimited power for the MGU-K directly, right?
5. So if MGU-H could harvest more than 2MJ/lap this additional power could be used only AFTER the ES has been depleted with those 120KW/lap or AFTER 33,3 sec/lap (had they choose the max. power mapping with 120KW allowed by the rules per lap), right?
6. Now MGU-H is mechanically linked with the turbo, practically being on the same shaft with it, right?
7. And MGU-K is on the driveshaft and it`s also mechanically linked with MGU-H, right?

... But if engine friction were to really be increasing, i suppose using the max rpm will can allow harvesting from the MGUH to take place ...

8. Regarding what you stated above we could assume that they need to run their ICE at their max. RPM coz this means max. RPM also for MGU-H, which in this case acts like a generator, hence produce more electricity/power and could be used by MGU-K in addition BUT APART from the 120KW allowed per lap, right?
9. So, in conclusion, it`s not a nonsense why all the teams are trying to run their ICE at their max. RPM, right?

[Tommy Cookers]

@ ringo ....... (sincerely)
conventionally imep-bmep is equivalent to the 'mechanical' losses eg your 15% that gives a notional 'mechanical efficiency' of 85%
this is easy to declare eg in an NA engine
these losses are a 'package' comprising the friction at bearings and pistons etc , and gas flow work 'pumping losses'

does this fairly account for the analysis of our compound engine ?
where the gas flow work (losses or otherwise) will be contained within the compressor and turbine work terms

FWIW by only small extrapolation of published data for measured engine mechanical friction
IIRC the mechanical friction in our engine will be about 9% (also some real engine mechanical efficiencies support this)

are you sure that (if assuming the 15% value for the 'loss package') that this is not 'double counting' of gas flow work ?

[Abarth]

[...¨]7. And MGU-K is on the driveshaft and it`s also mechanically linked with MGU-H, right?[...]

No!!
They are electrically linked. You can generate power in MGU-H and electrically feed MGU-K

[wuzak]

I`m trying to figure it out some rules from the above chart so indulge me with these following statements, please :

1. MGU-K can use max. 4MJ/lap which is coming ONLY from the ES - battery - , right?

No. Your statement isn't entirely clear. It would be better to say that energy transfer from the ES to the MGU-K is limited to 4MJ. Energy transfer from the MGU-K to the ES is limited to 2MJ.

2. Or in other measure units we could say that MGU-K has a max. power of 120KW that could be used for max.33,3 sec over a lap, right?

It is the maximum amount of time that the ES could power the MGU-K at maximum power.

3. Also from the graph we see that MGU-H can provide the ES with the missing 2MJ of energy the MGU-K can`t recover per lap, right?

The MGU-H could supply 10MJ to the system - if the turbine could provide enough power.

The MGU-K won't be recovering 2MJ per lap on most circuits - at least not from braking.

4. In addition, MGU-H can provide unlimited power for the MGU-K directly, right?

Correct.

5. So if MGU-H could harvest more than 2MJ/lap this additional power could be used only AFTER the ES has been depleted with those 120KW/lap or AFTER 33,3 sec/lap (had they choose the max. power mapping with 120KW allowed by the rules per lap), right?

No, the use of the MGU-H to power the MGU-K is not dependent on the ES. In fact, there are more losses associated with storing the energy in the ES and then extracting the energy from the ES than for the direct link between the two MGUs.

It is unlikely that much of the MGU-H energy recovered will be sent to the ES. And basically any time the engine is at full throttle the MGU-H will be sending energy to the MGU-K.

The energy from the ES will be used to top that up or on acceleration when the MGU-H is not providing much recovered energy.

Some energy will be sent from the MGU-H to the ES, if only to be later used for spooling up the turbo.

6. Now MGU-H is mechanically linked with the turbo, practically being on the same shaft with it, right?

The MGU-H is linked via a fixed gearing ratio and clutch to the turbo. The clutch allows the MGU-H to be disconnected from the turbo.

7. And MGU-K is on the driveshaft and it`s also mechanically linked with MGU-H, right?

No. As Abarth points out, the MGU-H and MGU-K are only connected electrically, via the controllers and inverters.

The rules specifically forbid the MGU-H from being mechanically connected to anything other than the turbo.

8. Regarding what you stated above we could assume that they need to run their ICE at their max. RPM coz this means max. RPM also for MGU-H, which in this case acts like a generator, hence produce more electricity/power and could be used by MGU-K in addition BUT APART from the 120KW allowed per lap, right?

Max rpm from the engine does not mean maximum rpm for the MGU-H.

It is likely that the MGU-H will reach maximum rpm at around the same time as the ICE reaches maximum power.

120kW is the power limit imposed on the MGU-K. If they can recover more in the MGU-H they are free to do so - but they can't send all that power to the MGU-K.

9. So, in conclusion, it`s not a nonsense why all the teams are trying to run their ICE at their max. RPM, right?

Whether or not they are actually trying to run their engines at maximum rpm is conjecture at this point. They will only do so if there is benefit to doing so.

[WhiteBlue]

You do not believe in 650 bhp from the engine?

Well I'm not so sure. .........So 650 is a very big improvement. 700hp I have no doubt is not thermodynamically possible.

http://speedblog.speed.com/speed/formul ... straights/

Speed thinks different.

However, the top speeds of the new turbo V6s are significantly higher, thanks to reduced downforce and an impressive engine-plus-ERS maximum of almost 900 horse power.

If you take out 160 hp for the MGU-K you need 700 horses from the ICE to come anywhere close to 900 hp.

[rjsa]

You do not believe in 650 bhp from the engine?

Well I'm not so sure. .........So 650 is a very big improvement. 700hp I have no doubt is not thermodynamically possible.

http://speedblog.speed.com/speed/formul ... straights/

Speed thinks different.

However, the top speeds of the new turbo V6s are significantly higher, thanks to reduced downforce and an impressive engine-plus-ERS maximum of almost 900 horse power.

If you take out 160 hp for the MGU-K you need 700 horses from the ICE to come anywhere close to 900 hp.

However, the top speeds of the new turbo V6s are significantly higher, thanks to reduced downforce and an impressive engine-plus-ERS maximum of almost 900 horse power.

Sure, unsigned newswire articles are THE SOURCE for reliable technical data.