2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[beelsebob]

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

Yes, this circuit is a relatively low fuel usage one, and no, we've seen historically that being short fuelled is usually better than not. It's simply faster to not carry around 5kg of fuel for the first half of the race than to be able to turn the wick up a little more.

[triart3d]

Here is the layout for the renault unit:
http://www.formula1.com/wi/full/ta_arti ... e_1175.jpg

and here, the mercedes:
http://www.formula1.com/wi/full/ta_arti ... e_1176.jpg

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?

First, the rules:
5.1.6
Pressure charging may only be effected by the use of a sole single stage compressor linked to a sole single stage exhaust turbine by a shaft assembly parallel to the engine crankshaft and within 25mm of the car centre line.
The shaft must be designed so as to ensure that the shaft assembly, the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity, an electrical motor generator (MGU-H) may be directly coupled to it


But now.. an idea:


A flywheel linked to MGU-H, conected to the shaft with a freewheel or overrunning clutch.


http://www.f1sport.it/2014/04/20/f1-vi- ... -mercedes/

[Cold Fussion]

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

Yes, this circuit is a relatively low fuel usage one, and no, we've seen historically that being short fuelled is usually better than not. It's simply faster to not carry around 5kg of fuel for the first half of the race than to be able to turn the wick up a little more.

It's 5kg of fuel they're not turning into electricity.

[henry]

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.

What if the clutch is a passive device, say an overrun clutch? I don't think there would be much reaction time issue then?

Imagine the system not as a turbocharger with electrical add-ons, but as an electrically powered supercharger with gas turbine assistance. If the turbine is connected to the MGUH with an overrun clutch then if it is not spinning as quickly as the compressor it is disconnected and makes no contribution. When it does spin up to the speed of the supercharger it connects and reduces the electrical energy required to drive the compressor.

In such a scheme I would imagine the control of the compressor to be entirely on the electrical side.

I can foresee an issue when there is no electrical power to drive the supercharger, such as when leaving the pits. There might be substantial turbo lag at the end of the pit lane, but I guess a racing driver could compensate for that.

What do you think?

[ppj13]

I think the disconnection of the turbine from the electric engine + mguh would be beneficial, however marginal.

I just dropped by to make a note: Ferrari and mercedes are using 50 to 67.5% of allowed energy per lap in China according to live telemetry from FIA. That could mean:

1) the rest has been turbocompounded
2) they couldn't harvest more

If we had this kind of thing lap after lap we could know which is true, because in case 2) the driver could have used a bit more during the most important laps.

Anyone has this info?

[.poz]

To me rules are quite clear: "sole single stage compressor linked to a sole single stage exhaust turbine by a shaft assembly designed so as to ensure that the shaft assembly, the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity". Compressor and turbine must have a mechanical link and rotate at the same angular velocity.

But a flywell connected with a clutch to the common shaft can be used like an extra ES

[Sasha]

People have to remember a thing about the Mercedes split turbo design by where did that idea come from?
The team and the core people of Mercedes came from where? Honda!!!
And the turbo manufacture(IHI)for the Mercedes engine has a old bond to Honda glory days.

The 2009 Honda(Brawn) was design to have a very different KERS than the other Manufactures.
Honda's unit was on the front of the Engine block for better weight balance and to keep it cooler than having it
mounted on the side of the engine block.

Kinda funny that Mercedes went the same route withe their MGUH and compressor.

[OO7]

The 2009 Honda(Brawn) was design to have a very different KERS than the other Manufactures.
Honda's unit was on the front of the Engine block for better weight balance and to keep it cooler than having it
mounted on the side of the engine block.

Kinda funny that Mercedes went the same route withe their MGUH and compressor.

The Mercedes MGU-K (KERS) was also attached to the front of the engine block.

[triart3d]

To me rules are quite clear: "sole single stage compressor linked to a sole single stage exhaust turbine by a shaft assembly designed so as to ensure that the shaft assembly, the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity". Compressor and turbine must have a mechanical link and rotate at the same angular velocity.

But a flywell connected with a clutch to the common shaft can be used like an extra ES

I think the same.

compressor can't rotate at 50.000 rpm, while turbine do at 100.000 rpm

[Sasha]

The 2009 Honda(Brawn) was design to have a very different KERS than the other Manufactures.
Honda's unit was on the front of the Engine block for better weight balance and to keep it cooler than having it
mounted on the side of the engine block.

Kinda funny that Mercedes went the same route withe their MGUH and compressor.

The Mercedes MGU-K (KERS) was also attached to the front of the engine block.

After they learned about it from Brawn in 2009 when that years car had to be changed to run the Mercedes engine.

[Sasha]

The 2009 Honda(Brawn) was design to have a very different KERS than the other Manufactures.
Honda's unit was on the front of the Engine block for better weight balance and to keep it cooler than having it
mounted on the side of the engine block.

Kinda funny that Mercedes went the same route withe their MGUH and compressor.

The Mercedes MGU-K (KERS) was also attached to the front of the engine block.

After they learned about it from Brawn in 2009 when that years car had to be changed to run the Mercedes engine.

The Mclaren/Mercedes and Magnetti Marelli KERS were gear driven from the crank and located in the front of the engine.I have to research but I thought they ran back along the block with the Honda system going forward under the fuel cell.

[hollus]

I don't think this has been posted here:
A big piece by Matt Sommers on cooling and exhausts.
http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/ ... nding.html

[ringo]

It's an interesting article. Especially on the function of the wastegates.
However i wouldn't draw the same conclusions he's had about "pre radiators". I simply don't think they are used.
You can't be the space advantage of using only 1 heat exchange in the sidepod, vs two.

Anyhow that's for the intercooler thread, as i think it's possible to have the water intercooler in the tank, but i'm more vering towards simply air to air.

It's interesting what he's saying about the ferrari charging protocol. That is affects their top end power because it harvests at the wrong time.

[chip engineer]

Interesting article on Honda high efficiency engine (nearly 40% without turbo compounding):
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/04 ... -hlsi.html

"Honda is developing a Homogeneous Lean Charge Spark Ignition (HLSI) combustion engine as one of the key elements in its technology roadmap for a higher thermal efficiency gasoline engine. Honda reported on its basic approach in a 2013 SAE paper"

This figure from the paper shows where the energy goes:

[ppj13]

What I get from the paper is that they are now able to burn leaner than before while maintaining NOx levels.

It is very relevant in road going vehicles, NA, at part throttle, with strict restrictions in NOx. It's by far the most usual operating condition.

But in F1 engines, going from af21 to af30 would require 33% more boost. Would the extra power in the compressor cancel the efficiency gain? I don't know.

Also, Nowhere it is said that one cannot use AF30 at the moment, only that it would create too much NOx. But F1 doesn't control NOx (yet).

Anyhow, even if it does not have IMO immediate application to F1, it was a great read, thanks for posting!

Regards,