2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[wuzak]

2011 had DRS on demand during qualifying laps.

2016 has super soft tires.

For 2014 Pirelli changed the tyre compounds so that they were harder. The 2014 super-soft was equivalent to the 2013 soft.

In 2015 in Monaco a few drivers suggested that the performance and wear rate of the super-soft was more like a medium tyre than a super-soft.

In 2011 the cars also had exhaust blown diffusers and more downforce in general.

And less weight.

[Juzh]

Problem is V6t which is making these cars fast in a straight is a direct contributor to the much higher weight.
As for the tires, I ain't buying 2016 super softs are in any way shape or form harder or slower than 2011 softs.

[wuzak]

Problem is V6t which is making these cars fast in a straight is a direct contributor to the much higher weight.
As for the tires, I ain't buying 2016 super softs are in any way shape or form harder or slower than 2011 softs.

Pirelli stated in 2014 that the tyres would be one step harder than in 2013. That is, the super-softs would be equivalent to the softs of 2013.

Which would mean they would be, approximately, as fast as the softs of 2013.

But they have again raised the minimum pressures for the tyres, which reduces grip as well.

[chip engineer]

Commercial application of turbo compounding:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/03 ... rucks.html
"For the first time in North America, Volvo’s 2017 D13 engine will be available with turbo compounding, a technology that recovers wasted exhaust heat and converts it to useable mechanical energy that is transferred back into the engine. The result of this recovered energy is up to a 6.5% improvement in fuel efficiency compared with previous engine models. Applications that benefit most from turbo compounding include long-haul, steady-state driving."

[Abarth]

Turbo Compunding in trucks is pretty "old", Scania did it already in the last decade, although not going electric, but they coupled it mechanically.
http://www.scania.de/trucks/main-compon ... _work.aspx

I'm still not sure how much efficiency gain turbocompounding will give to road cars, given that they run a high percentage on rather low part load conditions, and with lots of transients.
On highway, it sure could work fine. Anyway, such engines must be combined with intelligent dirvetrain management, to shift the operating point of the engine towards low rpm high load.

[TheScrutineer]

Turbo Compunding in trucks is pretty "old", Scania did it already in the last decade, although not going electric, but they coupled it mechanically.
http://www.scania.de/trucks/main-compon ... _work.aspx

I'm still not sure how much efficiency gain turbocompounding will give to road cars, given that they run a high percentage on rather low part load conditions, and with lots of transients.
On highway, it sure could work fine. Anyway, such engines must be combined with intelligent dirvetrain management, to shift the operating point of the engine towards low rpm high load.

This Scania set up uses two turbos and series with one linked up to the crankshaft. I suppose it doesn't offer boost control like the single turbo MGU stuff in F1 at the moment?

[FW17]

Is it possible during qualifying engines are mapped to increase fuel every alternate firing?

I mean

28 grams allowed

At 12000 rpm there will be 100 firing 16 a cylinder

0.046 grams per firing per cylinder in regular circumstance but will engine make more power if 0.023 grams used in first firing followed by 0.069 grams the next one follows the 0.023 gram cycle. With higher fuel the pressure and piston acceleration will be higher.

So is it possible to make more power with this sort of map?

[ME4ME]

Is it possible during qualifying engines are mapped to increase fuel every alternate firing?

I mean

28 grams allowed

At 12000 rpm there will be 100 firing 16 a cylinder

0.046 grams per firing per cylinder in regular circumstance but will engine make more power if 0.023 grams used in first firing followed by 0.069 grams the next one follows the 0.023 gram cycle. With higher fuel the pressure and piston acceleration will be higher.

So is it possible to make more power with this sort of map?

I have no idea about if that makes technical sense. But it sure sounds illigal to me. The fuel-rate regulation should be followed regardless which time unit is used. Otherwise you could by the same logic argue that "we're using 100kg per hour, were by 99kg for this 1,5 minut qualifying lap and the rest later in the hour". I don't know what the capability is of the FIA measuring unit though. So maybe it's doable even though probably not legal.

[gruntguru]

AFAIK it would be legal. The fuel flow measured is an average flow to the engine. The engine is only using (injecting) fuel for a small fraction of each cycle - there are considerable periods when no fuel is being injected. If you advanced FW17's idea a little further you could have an un-fired cycle (zero fuel) on one cylinder and double fuel on the next.

Could the combustion efficiency be increased by increasing the fuel charge on a particular firing event? (The mechanical efficiency wouldn't improve - friction and pumping losses would be much the same). Possibly. The best engines are achieving remarkable efficiency already so there is unlikely to be much in it.

The extreme case where some cylinders are permanently inactive is fascinating. If say 3 cylinders were inactive, they could be designed for lower friction, lower temperatures, valves sized and timed to minimize pumping loss (intake and exhaust on every stroke?). Boost would be much higher to burn the same fuel in a 800cc 3 cyl. Charge air cooling could be applied for the three active cylinders only. The charge for inactive cylinders could be heated using waste heat from the post-turbine exhaust. Inactive cylinders could feature in-cylinder expansion to recover some turbine energy direct to the crankshaft (circumventing the 120kW MGUK limit.)

[wuzak]

The legality would depend on the frequency at which the meter samples the fuel flow.

But if you give more fuel on the alternate power strokes and less on the others, would you not still end up with the same average power output over time?

Also, do you think that is what is going on with cylinder cutting? That some cylinders are getting the maximum fuel flow available, while others are getting minimal or none, the idea being that it is more efficient running some cylinders at close to 100% capacity and others at close to 0%.

[gruntguru]

The legality would depend on the frequency at which the meter samples the fuel flow.

The flow meter currently averages at a rate which makes it unable to detect individual injection events. Injection events can be multiple per cycle anyway eg early in the intake stroke will produce homogenous mixing and late in the compression stroke will produce highly stratified mixing.

But if you give more fuel on the alternate power strokes and less on the others, would you not still end up with the same average power output over time?

The question is whether the combustion efficiency is higher with a more highly charged cylinder. If it is, the single big-bang will produce more power than two little ones.

Also, do you think that is what is going on with cylinder cutting? That some cylinders are getting the maximum fuel flow available, while others are getting minimal or none, the idea being that it is more efficient running some cylinders at close to 100% capacity and others at close to 0%.

I would assume that cylinder cutting is just that. Some cylinders or cycles are run at full load while others are cut completely to reduce output under part load conditions.

However if greater efficiency is available at even higher load, it would make sense to cut cylinders even at max output.

[FW17]

I think you get a bigger bang at 1:18 than 1:27 AF I think atleast for a short time they will try to get to 1:14

I think it is legal as fuel monitoring is not done for individual injectors but all 6 together before the high pressure pump

[gruntguru]

I think you get a bigger bang at 1:18 than 1:27 AF I think atleast for a short time they will try to get to 1:14

Because the fuel quantity is limited by regulations, the AFR at max output can only be changed by controlling air quantity.

18:1 will produce a bigger bang than 14:1.

[dren]

In order to take advantage of running double the fuel in half the cylinders, wouldn't you be forced to run a larger compressor for those events, or would you just change your AF ratio?

You can't change the valve timing, but you can throttle the intake. Mercedes has two separate intakes, perhaps two throttles...?

Combustion processes would be so different between the two that I'd think you would want to stick with one and maximize combustion chamber design for it.

Cylinder cutting is more likely used for fuel savings rather than more output?

[Tommy Cookers]

..... The extreme case where some cylinders are permanently inactive is fascinating. If say 3 cylinders were inactive, they could be designed for lower friction, lower temperatures, valves sized and timed to minimize pumping loss (intake and exhaust on every stroke?). Boost would be much higher to burn the same fuel in a 800cc 3 cyl. Charge air cooling could be applied for the three active cylinders only. The charge for inactive cylinders could be heated using waste heat from the post-turbine exhaust. Inactive cylinders could feature in-cylinder expansion to recover some turbine energy direct to the crankshaft (circumventing the 120kW MGUK limit.)

presumably (loosely regarding this as a nominally active and a nominally inactive engine in parallel in comparison with the original engine) ......

the active engine .......
has about 6 bar 'boost' (induction pressure) ie the compressor efficiency is low and so there will be a lower recovery
(recovery does not rise with boost even at the efficiency achievable at the 3 bar boost of the original)
and friction and other losses (anyway small in the original engine) will only fall slightly

the inactive engine ......
does this have 6 bar boost ? - or eg 3 bar ? - or lower ?
what is the CR ? - eg maximal or minimal (incidental as an artifact of displacement) ?
when/how is the heat added ? - in-cylinder via a heat exchanger ? - or in cylinder by exhaust recirculation (addition) ?
the heat should be added after compression ?
what can its net output be ? if any ?


btw - if we supplied a rich mixture to the active there would be ......
continuous combustion (of fuel carried over) ahead of the turbine (if the active's and inactive's exhausts were combined there)
or combustion in the inactive cylinders if the active's exhaust was combined with the inactive's gasflow there
and the active would need far less than 6 bar boost, so improving turbine recovery and reducing friction losses etc
what's not to like ??