2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[rjsa]

And it's not only the amount of heat, but where it is dissipated. You have batteries and electronic circuits deep into the car and you have to make air get into there, for that you need space, and that equals bulkier sidepods.

[PhilS13]

Silly question maybe but I can't find the answer...

2013 V8 @ 30% efficiency and 750 bhp peak power -> 1750 "bhp" of heat generated (waste). Yes only at peak power operation but still.

2014 V6 @ 40% efficiency (self-sustained), 100 kg/hr fuel limit, 46MJ/kg fuel -> 1028 "bhp" of heat generated (waste)

We keep hearing the V6 needs massive cooling relative to last year. Where does that come from ?

Turbo cooling, intercooling, ES cooling, MGU-H cooling, MGU-K cooling etc.

Sure but ultimately if you take the powerunit as a whole I thought any heat rejected even in the sub-systems was accounted for in the 40% no? That is excluding the 2 MJ per lap coming in from the MGU-K. The only other energy outlet I see is the exhaust gaz

[ringo]

Well, we told you all about it as well. Renault simply do not have the know how of the recovery system that Ferrari and Mercedes have. In order to get maximum efficiency you have to utilize the waste gate close to zero. The other manuafcturers have mastered that problem which Renault are still in the process of cracking.

They mastered that problem by dumping the gas out the tailpipe. lol

[ringo]

Renault either underestimated the energy flow into the ES, or the demand of flow out of the ES, or a bit of both. There should never be a situation where the ES is full and there is regeneration going on unless there was some sort of failure. A wastegate should be utilized as a safety only, not as a controller.

There should be an energy level graph for the ES over a lap at each track. It would involve flow in and out from both MGUH and MGUK at each point over the lap. This would be part of the need for PU mapping at each race. Renault must have screwed up somewhere and likely were running really close to the ES limit of storage, hence the need for the resistors. Maybe the battery type and or capacity limit was part of the issue, too. Didn't they say they switched suppliers?

Maybe it is easier to just dump the energy in the quick off throttle stages and only charge the ES on high RPM turbine overrun.

These people are human, they can't play engine gods and study every little thing possible. That's a lot of work you're giving them there. The energy level graph doesn't really change anything. The rate of charge is the current problem. If the technolgy doesn't exist to permit it, then there's nothing that can be done.
You have two problems on your hands. A rate, and a capacity.

Listening to the Mercedes engine, you can tell that they have a huge ass turbine on the engine. I think they are actually using KERS offboost like the Mclaren P1 to fill the gaps in torque. I mentioned this earlier as well. It's always best to keep things simple then develop from that. Make the PU as simple as possible at this stage, since reliability is the game.
Power is easy to make, work on that before getting too nitty gritty on the fuel efficiency.

[pgfpro]

Running a very large turbine on a small displacement engines has its advantages when it comes to turbo compounding.
My graph below is from all my turbo spreadsheets and utilizing Borg Warner's Match Bot based on what I think F1 engineers are doing. This has the F1 fuel rule, turbine phi curves with drive pressure and back pressure all factored in.One thing to keep in mind when using a large turbine at low boost you don't need a waste-gate until the engine can start out flowing the turbo by running at a higher rpm.


I have built several small displacement engines with very large turbo's. Its common practice in the import world of drag racing.
Whats happens is you can have your waste-gate set to 45psi and if you don't run the rpm to feed the turbine the energy it needs you will not even get close to your target high boost levels. Right now on my car I can disconnect the boost control line (no waste-gate)and it will max out at 25 psi. @ 8000 rpm with my large frame turbo. Now as soon as I go over 8100 rpm the boost goes up another 2 psi. When I rev to 8500 rpm I will get full boost 45 psi and all the way to 9800 rpm.
On my car I can make 18 psi @ 4900rpm, 20 psi @ 5200 rpm, 22 psi @ 6200 rpm and 25 psi @ 7500 rpm.
So I think the F1 engineers have their rain maps ready by just running at a lower rpm and controlling the K units output in bad conditions.

From my graph above you can see when low load enable from the MGUH unit not much electricity is being generated. The turbine is acting as if has a very heavy wheel and not very efficient.

Now when the MGUH goes into high load enable, the back pressure ramps ups extremely fast and the turbines efficiency rate also goes up drastically, so theirs more energy to harvest. All the while keeping a good engine delta p.

[piast9]

We keep hearing the V6 needs massive cooling relative to last year. Where does that come from ?

As already answered - a lot of that heat in NA engine went through the exhaust. Additionally, the NA engine cooling liquid has to be kept at about 100°C while intercooler, batteries and electronics have to be cooled to much lower temperatures. The closer the cooled object's temperature is to the ambient the harder it is to exchange the heat with the atmosphere and the radiator has to be bigger.

[wuzak]

The history behind the 2014 power-plant rules

http://plus.autosport.com/premium/featu ... turbo-era/
(subscription only)

[Mr.G]

Renault want to postpone homologisation by 2 - 3 months.

[PhilS13]

We keep hearing the V6 needs massive cooling relative to last year. Where does that come from ?

As already answered - a lot of that heat in NA engine went through the exhaust. Additionally, the NA engine cooling liquid has to be kept at about 100°C while intercooler, batteries and electronics have to be cooled to much lower temperatures. The closer the cooled object's temperature is to the ambient the harder it is to exchange the heat with the atmosphere and the radiator has to be bigger.

Magnetti Marelli talking about pre-2014 KERS : In terms of cooling, it was possible to make the motor-generator and electronics work up to engine temperature (cooled by the vehicle water circuit, at about 100°).

Seems the operating temps are pretty high. I don't know if batteries are included under their "and electronics" though

But yeah I think I badly undestimated the amount of energy that went out through the exaust on the NA. Thanks for the answers.

[Shafto]

Hello,

I thought I seen somewhere that the teams are required to use a limited amount of engine maps. Is this true or am I imagining things? I was looking at the rules on the F1 site and only engine map related thing I found was they can have one map for each tire they run (soft, hard, inter, wet.)

So, are teams aloud to adjust the maps constantly? Or is it one map for the year?

Sorry if it has been covered in this thread before, but I am not going to read 385 pages!

[dren]

Hello,

I thought I seen somewhere that the teams are required to use a limited amount of engine maps. Is this true or am I imagining things? I was looking at the rules on the F1 site and only engine map related thing I found was they can have one map for each tire they run (soft, hard, inter, wet.)

So, are teams aloud to adjust the maps constantly? Or is it one map for the year?

Sorry if it has been covered in this thread before, but I am not going to read 385 pages!

Pedal torque demand maps. They can have however many PU maps they want.

[atanatizante]

Changes Renault have made since Jerez...

Change of battery cell provider
The individual cells that make up the Energy Store have individual over-charge and over-discharge protection. These were proving unreliable due to thermal/vibration issues. Whilst the energy store is sealed in our fitment, I am informed the cells are now supplied by Panasonic.
...

There is an article on AMuS regarding this matter: http://translate.google.ro/translate?sl ... 89033.html

However there should be made some amendments :

- Last year Renault, instead of Li-on batteries, they went for super capacitors from Panasonic, due to their lower weight and flexible packaging

- Together with loss in power (from 82 required they got some 60hp) the main drawback was they were running very hot and needed a greater thermal dissipation, which required some holes in the bodywork and coz Newey didn`t allow them to do that they faced endless KERS related problems

- In that article that batteries manufacturer is not juice (as you were figure out) and it`s in fact the French known company SAFT with their premium company SBG-Specialty Batteries Group

- Now coz Renault is doing all PU in-house, for a patriotic reason they choose SAFT for their ES, which use a High Voltage Battery System based upon SAFT VL 12V Li-ion NCA (for chemistry boys like I am : LiNiCoAlO2 acting like cathode) cell module.

- This battery cell has an energy to weight ratio of 266,4 KJ/kg, so in order to cope with 4MJ they need only for battery package alone some 15kg

- The remaining kilos for the system to be complete are done by the heat sink & thermoplastics and that`s to hit the mandatory ES 20-25 kg rule

- RBR want to stay with Panasonic super capacitors for being their long battery-partner and also for the faster charging & discharging cycles advantage but they fall short into the mandatory weight rule and not to mention their higher thermal operation window …

- Is also interesting to know that next year they will have the SSLi-ion – solid state Li-ion - technology available with some spectacular benefits : http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2 ... ctric-cars

Now all I wanna know is if they have:
1. A 12V battery pack anymore for charging ancillaries or they rely only on ES
2. An alternator anymore?

[TinoBoost]

Silly question maybe but I can't find the answer...

2013 V8 @ 30% efficiency and 750 bhp peak power -> 1750 "bhp" of heat generated (waste). Yes only at peak power operation but still.

2014 V6 @ 40% efficiency (self-sustained), 100 kg/hr fuel limit, 46MJ/kg fuel -> 1028 "bhp" of heat generated (waste)

We keep hearing the V6 needs massive cooling relative to last year. Where does that come from ?

Turbo cooling, intercooling, ES cooling, MGU-H cooling, MGU-K cooling etc.

Sure but ultimately if you take the powerunit as a whole I thought any heat rejected even in the sub-systems was accounted for in the 40% no? That is excluding the 2 MJ per lap coming in from the MGU-K. The only other energy outlet I see is the exhaust gaz

Sure, but remember there is hot exhaust going off the car. In 2013 that carried more of that ~1750hp waste. In 2014 it carries much much less.

Also, it is easier to cool stuff at high temperatures, as Heat flow depends directly on temperature difference. Engine coolant is very hot, thus a small radiator can do. Intercoolers, electrics (batteries, motors) most likely do not run as hot as engine coolant. thus more heating exchange area is required.

Now consider the cramped, small area in an F1 car. You got to heat many things using different temperatures. You cant easily heat things in series. Example, if you have an intercooler in front of an coolant radiator, the intercooler heats the air to lets say 40C from 20C coming in. Now the radiator is using a cooling stream that would correspond to 40C, not 20C. This is even worse for cooling electronics. Thus one adds holes and paths in the sidepods/body to be able to get the "best air" at the right places.

[ESPImperium]

Im hearing wild rumours going about that Red Bull may be courting Cosworth if Renault don't solve the problems quick enough.

[wuzak]

Im hearing wild rumours going about that Red Bull may be courting Cosworth if Renault don't solve the problems quick enough.

Caterham did 117 laps on Saturday and Toro Rosso managed 81. Lotus did only 33, but they are a week behind everybody else. I don't think all the problems with the Red Bull are down to Renault.