2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[lebesset]

Just now in the team principle confrence rob white suggested mercedes were being conservative with their estimates and that to be competitive this year you had to be at 40 % efficiency now. That pretty interesting to me.

a must watch conference ....no team principals present !
confirmation from the honda representative that , as widely stated , they will be open to other customers in 2016 on but not 2015

also note the comments about the efficiency of engines above 10, 500 rpm !

[Tommy Cookers]

if what's being advocated by Pierce89 is full-time electric drive of the compressor ......

IMO it's a good thing for a road car, but in F1 .....
more and bigger electrical machinery and drives would be needed
for the minimum 1.9 bar abs induction pressure, 2x 30 kW more machinery and 2x 30 kw more drive would be needed
this could go to total 4x60 kW, even 4x 100 kw if/when exhaust pressure and boost are raised eg when fuel allocation is reduced
(PU efficiency will increase with raising of exhaust pressure, even into backpressure, maybe Mercedes is already there ?)

compressor power will need to at least rise proportionate to the boost above natural 'atmospheric' pressure, or worse
(natural pressure with tuned induction & exhaust systems reaches 1.2 bar, so our minimum 2014 'boost' is only 0.7 bar)

the PU scheme being used is ingenious, partly in its minimising the number and size of electrical machines and their drives
though F1 could manage well on traditional-style twin turbos plus a seperate recovery turbine
for F1 drivers there's no lag issue at these (current/anticipated or 1988) boost levels


btw - do we know who has a clutch between the turbo and the mgu-h and how/when they use it ??

[ringo]

Here is the layout for the renault unit:


and here, the mercedes:


It is being touted that because the Mercedes has it's mguh in the middle. It has the advantage of being able to decouple from either the compressor or the turbine as it so chooses.
This would mean that when you want to drive the compressor alone you can decouple from the turbine and send all the power to it.
Likewise when you want to generate, you can decouple from the compressor and drive the MGUH with the turbine.

Now, ignoring the functionality. I don't this this suggestion is a legal one. As there would effectively be two or 3 shafts between the turbo and compressor. Correct?

But if we assume having more than one common shaft between the compressor and turbine are legal, i don't really see if isolating either side for use with MGUH is much of a benefit. If there are what can those be?

[Pierce89]

For one, you could recover more energy if the turbine was unencumbered by the compressor, you could also control boost better because you wouldn't have to spin the turbine up too.

[chip engineer]

But if we assume having more than one common shaft between the compressor and turbine are legal, i don't really see if isolating either side for use with MGUH is much of a benefit. If there are what can those be?

Not being coupled to the turbine would allow the MGU-H to increase boost pressure faster than if it had to accelerate the turbine as well as the compressor, so less turbo lag. Then when the turbine rpm increases to being equal to the speed of the compressor/MGU-H, the clutch could easily be re-engaged, and power harvested.

[ringo]

For one, you could recover more energy if the turbine was unencumbered by the compressor, you could also control boost better because you wouldn't have to spin the turbine up too.

As soon as you decouple the compressor. you know that the engine will have no boost right?

And as for the turbine, you don't need to spin it up to a large extent since the exhaust gases are blowing it anyway.

To me it doesn't change much if both devices are operated on the same shaft.

As if one is being driven, the other wont be driven or used to harvest energy from. There are unique situations where decoupling could be advantageous, but i don't think it explains mercedes engine advantage, or their advantage over their customers.

[ringo]

But if we assume having more than one common shaft between the compressor and turbine are legal, i don't really see if isolating either side for use with MGUH is much of a benefit. If there are what can those be?

Not being coupled to the turbine would allow the MGU-H to increase boost pressure faster than if it had to accelerate the turbine as well as the compressor, so less turbo lag. Then when the turbine rpm increases to being equal to the speed of the compressor/MGU-H, the clutch could easily be re-engaged, and power harvested.

From what i see, the motor will move slower without the assistance of the turbine. leaving it coupled to the turbine would actually make it accelerate the compressor faster, as both torques are in the same rotational direction.

[autogyro]

What if the shaft is never connected in the M/GUH and the armature is in two pieces

[xpensive]

...
Now, ignoring the functionality. I don't this this suggestion is a legal one. As there would effectively be two or 3 shafts between the turbo and compressor. Correct?
...

Terrific images Ringo, dix points!

Au contraire, for all sorts of mechanical reasons, the MHPE unit must have the shaft in three pieces, no way in the world you can make an arrangement like that with what, a 8 mm dia & 600 long mm shaft, even if you fatten it a bit in the middle.

Hell of a mechanical arrangement anyways, how in the wide world of sports did they do that @ +100 kRpm?

[langwadt]

...
Now, ignoring the functionality. I don't this this suggestion is a legal one. As there would effectively be two or 3 shafts between the turbo and compressor. Correct?
...

Terrific images Ringo, dix points!

Au contraire, for all sorts of mechanical reasons, the MHPE unit must have the shaft in three pieces, no way in the world you can make an arrangement like that with what, a 8 mm dia & 600 long mm shaft, even if you fatten it a bit in the middle.

Hell of a mechanical arrangement anyways, how in the wide world of sports did they do that @ +100 kRpm?

for the length of the mgu the shaft can be much bigger, the rotor is much bigger than 8mm

[xpensive]

This part of the Technical regulations might be of interest in the context above;

5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the exhaust turbine of a pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched.

[autogyro]

This part of the Technical regulations might be of interest in the context above;

5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the exhaust turbine of a pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched.

If the MGU-H had a two piece armature, the part of the armature directly connected to the turbine would meet the regulation.
The front part of the armature would not be part of the MGU-H, it would simply be an electric machine driving the compressor.

[chip engineer]

But if we assume having more than one common shaft between the compressor and turbine are legal, i don't really see if isolating either side for use with MGUH is much of a benefit. If there are what can those be?

Not being coupled to the turbine would allow the MGU-H to increase boost pressure faster than if it had to accelerate the turbine as well as the compressor, so less turbo lag. Then when the turbine rpm increases to being equal to the speed of the compressor/MGU-H, the clutch could easily be re-engaged, and power harvested.

From what i see, the motor will move slower without the assistance of the turbine. leaving it coupled to the turbine would actually make it accelerate the compressor faster, as both torques are in the same rotational direction.

That depends on how much power the turbine is producing at that instant and on the rotational inertia of the turbine. For a large turbine and the condition of going from off throttle to full on, I suspect the MGU-H can accelerate the compressor alone faster than the turbine can accelerate itself initially. This condition may only last a fraction of a second, though. Whether that is worth the extra weight and reliability issue of having a clutch is questionable.

[ringo]

To compound that as well, you have to consider these clutches that are being used. Their reaction time will defeat the purpose as well. The PU is a very dynamic behaving thing.

[Tommy Cookers]

again, in today's race some cars apparently used a lot less than 100 kg of fuel
is the circuit light on fuel, so that they loaded less than 100 kg ?
eg one might think both Ferrari's race would have gone better had they used nearly 100 kg not 95 kg