2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Abarth]

[....]with the 100kg/h fuel flux limit higher rev equals to more air with the same fuel, so you have more internal friction and no extra power.

You won't need more combustion air, if you use same F/A ratio. But due to higher revs, boost demand will fall, and you can use a bigger part of the (more or less constant) exhaust energy to drive MGU-H.
Sending directly to MGU-K will increase compounded power at higher than 10'500 / min despite higher friction losses.

AFAIR Cosworth predicts / simulates peak power in self sustained mode (compounded) at 12'000/min or so.

[Abarth]

Here you can find a table with the consumption figures of the first ten cars:
http://www.f1passion.it/2014/04/f1-gp-m ... egia-gomme

If I put an additional data point of zero liters (%) consumed at lap 0 and make a linear curve fitting with Excel, it seems that
- most have saved from a half to one litre until lap 15 (Alonso: 1.7483 kg x lap - 0.459kg, Vettel: 1.7712 kg x lap - 0.6334kg, Bottas: 1.6358 kg x Lap - 1.0902kg)
- the consumption figure seems to correlate with the drag of the cars, Ferrari of Alonso and the RB's having a higher downforce setup (could be seen in the times in S2), and that the Williams were in a quite lower downforce configuration.

Btw, there is a consumtion peak at Lap 34 for all cars.

[dren]

Could be, but I would be surprised if the hardware between the two competitors is very much different, more like MHPE
has had a great deal of help from mother Daimler in managing all this power constantly flowing back and forth?

The MGU-H is obviously the key here as the MGU-K has been a known entity for all since when, 2009?

Yes, I would love to see energy flow graphics during the race as well. That is where Mercedes has the advantage; it's a power unit, not individual components.

[dren]

Here you can find a table with the consumption figures of the first ten cars:
http://www.f1passion.it/2014/04/f1-gp-m ... egia-gomme

If I put an additional data point of zero liters (%) consumed at lap 0 and make a linear curve fitting with Excel, it seems that
- most have saved from a half to one litre until lap 15 (Alonso: 1.7483 L x lap - 0.459, Vettel: 1.7712 L x lap - 0.6334, Bottas: 1.6358 L x Lap - 1.0902)
- the consumption figure seems to correlate with the drag of the cars, Ferrari of Alonso and the RB's having a higher downforce setup (could be seen in the times in S2), and that the Williams were in a quite lower downforce configuration.

Btw, there is a consumtion peak at Lap 34 for all cars.

Is this a % of total fuel the team put in, or a % of the max limit? If it is a % of the total the team put in, the numbers should be closer.

[Abarth]

Is this a % of total fuel the team put in, or a % of the max limit? If it is a % of the total the team put in, the numbers should be closer.

I'm pretty sure this is % of total allowed, i.e. 100% = 100 kg

Reasons:
- I do not think the FIA knows how much a team does fill in the tank
- Teams have to account for formation lap which is not included in the allotted 100kg

[ppj13]

I see some people not seeing clearly energy flow. Let's see if I my humble POV helps to understand it (and let's see if we all agree)

At full driver demand, the MGUK should be giving 120Kw almost all the time. 60Kw coming from the MGUH and 60kw from the batteries. This is the predominant mode.

Therefore, MGUK will never need more than 2Mj per lap and breaking the harvest limit is not a risk.

The challenges are:

1) Harvesting 2Mj in fast tracks from MGUK. Needs a very powerful and precise MGUK and brake by wire.
2) Harvesting more than 60Kw from MGUH after feeding the compressor. Needs a very efficient turbine and compressor. (not using fuel hungry tricks like late injection).

Fuel economy is greatly affected by these two challenges. (eg: If you manage to harvest a lot of energy from the MGUH at full demand, you will use less energy from the batteries at full demand, and you can start considering using electric power below full demand, which is, obviously, very good for fuel economy).

It is not clear that teams can benefit of powering the MGUH and venting exhaust gases to get very expensive extra hp for overtakings.

[ppj13]

To sum it up, it's not about how much power a power unit delivers, but how efficient the car it is. Peak power means nothing now. It is silly to talk about 10 HP more or 60 hp less. There is simply not such concept like it used to be. A good PU with bad brake by wire can deliver a lot more peak power and yet a lot less speed at the speed traps during a race.

[dren]

It is not clear that teams can benefit of powering the MGUH and venting exhaust gases to get very expensive extra hp for overtakings.

What do you mean by that? The MGUH is clutched, so you can simply disengage it and drive the MGUK 100% from the ES. But you'll be wasting exhaust gasses to control the turbine from overspeeding. As stated in earlier posts by TC the compounding from the MGUH (up to almost 20%) is "free" power. So you will be losing the 100-120hp from the MGUH->MGUK and pulling that from the ES to make up for it.

The overtaking maps are probably a switch to full fuel flow and full MGUK output and maybe an increase in rev limit to just pass 12k rpms. Mercedes is probably running like this most of the time due to superior energy management around a lap. I am guessing other teams are not able to use the full 160hp MGUK output as often.

I also think a poor brake by wire will still allow for high speed if the ES has the energy to give. You'll lose time in the braking zone, but after that you are on the throttle. The problems with the brake by wire seem to be driver feel and confidence. They may still be harvesting the needed energy, just forcing the driver to brake earlier/different. Lotus stated it is having brake by wire issues but is still having competitive cornering speeds. They just don't have the max power down the straights which I'm guessing is MGUH->MGUK issues stemming from their reported turbo cooling issues.

[ppj13]

@dren

I believe (but others not) that venting exhaust gases around the turbine reduces backpressure and increases the power. Just a little bit (maybe 10 or 20 extra hp) at a big cost (60 or 100 extra electric kW) so very inefficient but possible maybe for qualy.

If you declutch the MGUH and the turbo will overspeed. If you declutch the turbo and waste some gases, the solution is halfway from normal operation to what I mean.

I also don't see clearly that more rpm means more power when fuel is limited. The higher the revs, the lesser the power the compressor needs, all right. But the more the pumping losses, in the same amount, I believe.

If high rpm could give more power, or even similar power, teams would have gone for a sweet spot over 13000rpm, because torque is always the enemy of the clutch and the gearbox. They all seem to aim for the sweet spot at 10500, though.

One question: Did somebody blew a turbo on track?

[ppj13]

I also think a poor brake by wire will still allow for high speed if the ES has the energy to give.

Exactly my point: the ES will not. Remember I was talking about a race.

[dren]

I also think a poor brake by wire will still allow for high speed if the ES has the energy to give.

Exactly my point: the ES will not. Remember I was talking about a race.

Right, I agree. Depends on what makes the drive by wire poor. From what I am reading, it is not the lack of charging, but the driver feel. The driver cannot brake harder, later thus losing time but not charge.

Turbine cooling for the Renault seems to be an issue with a few teams so I'm assuming they cannot load it as high as they would like with the MGUH. That hurts the Renault teams down the straights. They probably also have some controller issues to send energy to the MGUK from two places.

As for the turbo blowing on track...I haven't heard of anyone doing that yet. I would think with as many sensors as the PUs have on them, they will retire the car before anything like that happens.

[Kiril Varbanov]

Rumor has it that fuel flow may be banned after Spain GP - story ran by AMuS - http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 25927.html

[dren]

Edit...

They state they are banning the modification of the homoligated flow sensors. It says TR, Lotus and Red Bull are modifying the flow sensor threads where the fuel lines attach.

It goes on to say there are rumors that the fuel Total is providing is also causing issues with the readings.

[Holm86]

Rumor has it that fuel flow may be banned after Spain GP - story ran by AMuS - http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 25927.html

Thats a pretty bad translation Kiril. As I reed the article it says that it will be prohibited to adjust the gill sensor. Because apparently all Renault engine teams has modified the Gill sensor to fit between the tank and the fuel pick-up.

And modifications of the sensor will not be allowed from the Spanish GP onwards. And the sensor must be used in its original condition.

Im surprised the FIA even allowed renault powered teams to fiddle with the sensor in the first place.

It doesnt say anything about banning or removing the fuel flow limit.

[dren]

Im surprised the FIA even allowed renault powered teams to fiddle with the sensor in the first place.

It doesnt say anything about banning or removing the fuel flow limit.

Right, based on his post I thought the sensors would be scrapped and we'd have wild qualifying sessions.

I am also surprised Renault teams were allowed to modify the sensors in any way shape or form.