2017 More aero, more fuel saving

[strad]

The fuel flow limit is pushing development of the engine in the right way

Funny how when something coincides with someones biased interests it's the "right way".
See from "my" biases' it's totally the wrong way.

[wuzak]

The fuel flow limit is pushing development of the engine in the right way

Funny how when something coincides with someones biased interests it's the "right way".
See from "my" biases' it's totally the wrong way.

Do your biases want more noise and less power?

[SR71]

The fuel flow limit is pushing development of the engine in the right way

Funny how when something coincides with someones biased interests it's the "right way".
See from "my" biases' it's totally the wrong way.

So you agree that to people who see a progressively better future (and higher performance standards) your ideals are the "wrong way"?

[strad]

The fuel flow limit is pushing development of the engine in the right way

I understand the idea, I just don't think that everything even motor racing must be green... I wouldn't care how much fuel they use or anything about their carbon footprint. It's all so infinitesimal.

[zac510]

If you were watching your first ever F1 race on TV and there was no commentary or the commentary was in another language you wouldn't have a clue that there was any kind of fuel limit. You just can't *see* cars doing fuel saving until the commentator tells you they are (even then, commentators seem to be guessing often).

Thus concern about fuel saving is primarily a psychological/emotional issue. Of course once a person has attached emotion to an idea its extremely hard to change or have their opinion changed.

[bhall II]

Thus concern about fuel saving is primarily a psychological/emotional issue.

The nature of all fandom is passion. Thus, it's primarily a psychological/emotional issue.

For that matter, the nature of open-wheel/open-cockpit racing is purely aesthetic. Thus, it too is primarily a psychological/emotional issue.

I think this debate is rarely more hypocritical than when the empiricists forget what they're talking about.

A desire for the noise of an obnoxiously loud engine to make one's hair stand on end, or anything of the like, is no more or less valid than a desire for the innate satisfaction of conscientious consumption. It's just different.

[Tommy Cookers]

Damn right. F1 increased fuel efficiency from 30% to almost 50% and it's drivable also. No roadcar manufacturer pulled this of in far more years. It is insane.

what is insane ?
the F1 car is a NOx generator
road cars have for the last 30 years been inefficient because NOx catalysis requires rich running and tightening NOx limits prevent much lean running

[Edis]

Damn right. F1 increased fuel efficiency from 30% to almost 50% and it's drivable also. No roadcar manufacturer pulled this of in far more years. It is insane.

what is insane ?
the F1 car is a NOx generator
road cars have for the last 30 years been inefficient because NOx catalysis requires rich running and tightening NOx limits prevent much lean running

The current F1 engines are probably producing less NOx than the old ones.

By the way, many new gasoline engines are running lean. These engines typically use a NOx storage catalyst and switch to a rich fuel mixture only when it needs to regenerate the catalyst. But technologies like jet ignition could potentially allow lean running with low NOx emissions, even without a reducing catalyst.

[Tommy Cookers]

.......But technologies like jet ignition could potentially allow lean running with low NOx emissions, even without a reducing catalyst.

F1 seems to be running at an equivalence ratio no higher than 1.4
this will produce plenty of NOx in a high-boosted high CR engine

and a road engine would need to run far leaner to be NOx-clean 'engine-out' (ie no NOx catalysis needed)
this currently seems impracticable even with TJI (unless running on gas eg hydrogen or methane)
though presumably the F1 'wonderfuel' is specially good (for a liquid fuel) at combusting lean

we know lean mixture spreads the heat over a greater mass of air, so reducing peak temperature and heat loss to coolant and exhaust

[Edis]

.......But technologies like jet ignition could potentially allow lean running with low NOx emissions, even without a reducing catalyst.

F1 seems to be running at an equivalence ratio no higher than 1.4
this will produce plenty of NOx in a high-boosted high CR engine

and a road engine would need to run far leaner to be NOx-clean 'engine-out' (ie no NOx catalysis needed)
this currently seems impracticable even with TJI (unless running on gas eg hydrogen or methane)
though presumably the F1 'wonderfuel' is specially good (for a liquid fuel) at combusting lean

we know lean mixture spreads the heat over a greater mass of air, so reducing peak temperature and heat loss to coolant and exhaust

At lambda 1.4 the NOx emissions should have dropped off significantly compared with the roughly lambda 0.95 used by the old engines.



A low NOx engine using jet ignition would go leaner, as mentioned here

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/10 ... 01027.html

[Tommy Cookers]

that's a generic/indicative diagram for a conventional/lowish mep N/A engine with a conventional/lowish CR
btw N/A F1 ran 10-20% rich (ie not your 5%), eg Ferrari tests showed this mixture improved combustion consistency at high rpm and raised max power

and we know NOx is very temperature-sensitive
boosted F1 has a raised charge temperature, a very high CR, reduced cooling, and a backpressure/intentional residuals
the peak temperatures in F1 are far higher (for any given AFR) so they would need to go leaner to reach the NOx cancellations in your diagram

and ..... the source you linked is using propane for the JI to make possible their very high degree of leaning


EDIT - road car makers seem to be doing their job - eg the Prius ICE gets 40.5% bte (presumably in NOx catalyst inactive phase)

[rjsa]

The fuel flow limit is pushing development of the engine in the right way

Funny how when something coincides with someones biased interests it's the "right way".
See from "my" biases' it's totally the wrong way.

Do your biases want more noise and less power?

I for one could live with that.

[StrikeForceF1]

If you were watching your first ever F1 race on TV and there was no commentary or the commentary was in another language you wouldn't have a clue that there was any kind of fuel limit. You just can't *see* cars doing fuel saving until the commentator tells you they are (even then, commentators seem to be guessing often).

Thus concern about fuel saving is primarily a psychological/emotional issue. Of course once a person has attached emotion to an idea its extremely hard to change or have their opinion changed.

The difference is the cars look so slow.. they donot look like they are being pushed to the limit..If you watched the Schumacher domination in Ferrari...even when the Ferrari was the best it was a joy to watch Schumacher thrashing the lights out of the Ferrari...you could see the speed..You see the car been driven on the limit..granted today's formula is not only about the engine..there is a whole host of factors that make this era not what the fans want. Another thing was when you heard the V10's live they were something to behold... even on tv the sound makes your hair stand on end...today's f1 cars sound like lawnmowers and that is what most of the fans are missing and than it becomes a psycological/emotional issue..but what you say is true once the emotion is attached it is extremely hard to change the idea.

[riff_raff]

Damn right. F1 increased fuel efficiency from 30% to almost 50% and it's drivable also. No roadcar manufacturer pulled this of in far more years. It is insane.

what is insane ?
the F1 car is a NOx generator
road cars have for the last 30 years been inefficient because NOx catalysis requires rich running and tightening NOx limits prevent much lean running

Think about how much NOx is produced by the turbofan engines of a cargo jet used to transport the tons of equipment and supplies needed by each F1 team for a race event on another continent. If NOx or CO2 emissions released into the atmosphere from an F1 race event are truly a concern, it would be far more effective for the FIA to implement regulations limiting the total emissions resulting from all of the team's activities.

[strad]

A desire for the noise of an obnoxiously loud engine to make one's hair stand on end, or anything of the like, is no more or less valid than a desire for the innate satisfaction of conscientious consumption. It's just different.

.
And has nothing to do with racing.