2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[PlatinumZealot]

The split turbine is actually very common in miniature turbines. The separate the compressor and turbine to make space for the combustor. And yes, I am talking about radial turbines.

Nothing new really.

Ok now...
Back onto the issue of Charging the ERS using the Toyota LMP1 solution.... It is very simple.

There are two options:
1) Front wheel KERS - the Majority of the braking energy comes from the front wheels. You will get more than twice the amount of energy recovery by applying KERS to the front wheels. As a result you will end up with four wheel drive cars however, if the regulations allow.

2)
You attach an MGU-H to the Naturally aspirated V8 engine with a bypass valve. Unlike a turbo-charger, it has no compressor, only a turbine. The turbine would be designed to be very small and restrictive. So you do not want to send 100% of the gasses through it. And due to it's parasitic nature, you only want to divert a small portion of exhaust to it when you are charging the batteries or sending power to the KERS or at low rpms. The branch of pipes going to the turbine would be only large enough for a portion of the gasses to go through so most the exghaust gas is bypassed keeping the NA sound.

[mrluke]

If only there was more freedom in the regulations so that we could have more different solutions rather than everybody being forced to do the same thing

[Facts Only]

If only there was more freedom in the regulations so that we could have more different solutions rather than everybody being forced to do the same thing

Which would just mean that the field would be even more spread out with massive differences between different engine suppliers.... Until everyone copied the best engine with correct solution and they would all be the same anyway.

There seems to be some misconception that open rules mean everyone makes something completely different, all it really means is that it takes the some people longer to get to the correct answer. Look at any era of the engine rules and by the end everyone has made it to the same answer. In the last open era (3.0l 1995-2005) nobody mandated V10's but that was what everyone used (by the end) because that was the correct answer amd every championship in that era was won by a V10 (I think)

Let just imagine for a second that for 2014 all that was mandated was a fuel and KW flow limit, one of two things would happened.
1) Merc, Renault and Ferrari would have spent millions/billions more tuning the solution to the nth degree to all end up with the same solution (moving staff make this likely) and we would be in the same position we are now but with even more expensive engines.
2) Merc get it right (for example, as they have done this year) while Renault and Ferrari head down dead ends, Merc are 3-4-5... Seconds ahead (rather than 2) Renault and Ferrari spend until 2020 trying to catch up creating massive spending war while Merc retain their advantage.

The best team will always win, more open rules just mean they will win by more.

[Forza]

Here is prtsc of Marelli WinTAX simulation software used for the 2014 ABD Grand Prix fuel consumption/energy recovery analysis Omnicorse - Theoretical fuel consumption/energy recovery analysis for the 2014 ABD Grand Prix using the Magneti Marelli WinTAX software

[Blanchimont]

From the window ES.gra and the slope of the mguh line, one can calculate the power of the mguh used in this simulation.

(1088 kJ - 550 kJ) / (39 s - 24,5 s) = 37,1 kW = 50,5 hp

Does the article state anything about who exactly did this simulation and when it was done?

Edit: The screenshot says Nov 16 2014.

[Brian Coat]

Thanks.

Who did the simulation?

Well, Omnicorse.it often publish wintax simulations, so my guess is that it's their own simulation of a representative lap.

They sometimes post an article ahead of the race, commenting on technical aspects, highlighted by a wintax simulation.

I think we can rest assured this is not based on actual team data!

Wintax is downloadable from Marelli website : free to Unis etc. I think

[ringo]

Looking back on the season and the advantage that Mercedes had over the other engines. Is it possible that they simply were somehow admitting more fuel to their engine?
Maybe they found some kind of workaround for the mass flow limitations?

This assuming they have an ICE advantage, which I think they don't. I feel it's more in the ERS where the advantage is. But talks of improvements for next year seems like it's related to ICE improvements, and possibly turbine and MGUH design.

[gruntguru]

It is very unlikely they are cheating the fuel flow rate. Their overall race consumption seems to confirm that.

Their advantage lies in the continuous power (ICE crank plus turbine surplus) and possibly the way they vary the mix for different race conditions i.e. the tradeoff of crankshaft power v's MGUH power is varied depending on the priority of the moment. If absolute max power to the wheels is needed, the PU is run to maximise crankshaft power while drawing enough energy from the ES to run the MGUK at its maximum 120 kW. If it is possible to run with somewhat reduced power to the wheels, the PU is operated at best efficiency i.e. maximum continuous power (crank + MGUH). If even less power is needed to the wheels, (and the ES is not full) the PU is still operated at max TE and surplus energy is directed to the ES.

[wuzak]

It is very unlikely they are cheating the fuel flow rate. Their overall race consumption seems to confirm that.

Their advantage lies in the continuous power (ICE crank plus turbine surplus) and possibly the way they vary the mix for different race conditions i.e. the tradeoff of crankshaft power v's MGUH power is varied depending on the priority of the moment. If absolute max power to the wheels is needed, the PU is run to maximise crankshaft power while drawing enough energy from the ES to run the MGUK at its maximum 120 kW. If it is possible to run with somewhat reduced power to the wheels, the PU is operated at best efficiency i.e. maximum continuous power (crank + MGUH). If even less power is needed to the wheels, (and the ES is not full) the PU is still operated at max TE and surplus energy is directed to the ES.

Certainly early in teh season the Ferrari was rumpured to only be able to direct MGUH power to the ES, which restricted the amount of time they could get full power.

[wuzak]

Looking back on the season and the advantage that Mercedes had over the other engines. Is it possible that they simply were somehow admitting more fuel to their engine?

No.

The chance of getting caught and the damage to theor reputation woudl be too high.

I think, basically, daimler Benz invested more time, effort and money into the engine than Ferrari or Renault. Apparently Renault, for example, only mounted the ERS systems on the engine in December last year, a mere few months before the start of the season.

It may also be telling that amongst the 60 staff Ferrari have recently hired there was a combustion specialist and an ERS specialist.

[Blackout]

And when you look at the Merc engine you notice how clean and well finished it is compared to the Renault (it's the Lotus PU here.. not the best example... but the RBR one is not much better)




Yeah Jalinier who departed from Renault says Mercedes out-spent Renault (and Ferrari)

“When Ferrari and Renault are getting similar results, and Mercedes has a significant advantage, the first thing is to look at the level of investment,” he told the French magazine Auto Hebdo.
“At Renault the same level of investment was maintained, while Mercedes raised the bar very high, investing a lot of money, resources and technology,” said Jalinier.
“As a result, they were much better prepared than us and the Italians who have operated at the known and practiced levels of investment.
“In the paddock,” he continued, “you did hear about these enormous and – in our view – disproportionate investments by Mercedes, but do you believe these rumours or not?
“In the end it was true. In terms of resources used for this project, it is clear that Ferrari and us invested far less,” said Jalinier.
“We are 320 people at Viry, but together with the chassis and the engine there were up to 1,250 at Mercedes. With those resources, it is obvious that you are not confined to one solution but can go with two or even three in parallel during the development phase,” he said.
“This is a powerful force to achieve the right solution.”
Renault has been heavily criticised by its formerly title-dominant premier team partner Red Bull amid the 2014 ‘crisis’, but Jalinier insists that “with the means available, we completed the project entirely correctly”.

Obviously Renault did another mistake by developping 4 different variants of its PU with its 4 customers... They wasted too much ressources and too much time doing that and they produced a basic and 'universal' PU unlike Ferrari and Merc who produced a single PU for a particular chassis. Cyril Abiteboul even said that Caterham had almost as much dyno testing time as Red Bull in Viry!

However, he does admit that Renault should have adopted the Mercedes-like approach of optimising a single ‘power unit’ package, rather than offering customised solutions to teams like Red Bull and Lotus.
“The advantage of Mercedes was to have an optimised version of the chassis and engine specifically for Mercedes GP, their own team, that was used as is by the client teams or adapted to their own needs at their own risk,” said Jalinier.

[trinidefender]

I've heard this been said a few times now. Renault supposedly gave each customer a different power unit. How much can each power unit be different between customers with how strict the homologation rules are? As far as I'm aware I thought all hardware that actually counted had to be the same. I can understand engine maps but what else?

[Paul]

Cooling, exhaust... Other manufacturers possibly left it to the teams to figure out with as little support as possible.

[mrluke]

Couldn't they homologate different versions for each customer? Whereas Merc and Ferrari just submitted one PU.

[Blackout]

Yes each Renault powered car has very different exhausts and wastegates, a different airbox for the compressor, very different cooling solutions for the charge-air...

Couldn't they homologate different versions for each customer? Whereas Merc and Ferrari just submitted one PU.

AFAIK, only one PU can be homologated. That means the exhausts, the intercoolers etc do not count as PU... but when I read the rules, the exahausts will be frozen and changing them (pressure charging: from engine exhaut flanges to turbine inlet) will cost a token. so wtf?