2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Tommy Cookers]

minor point .....
should be 460 bar differential (with the compression as given above) ?
so a pressure reduction of 7.35% and a flow rate reduction of about 3.6%

or 360 bar differential if they are using 400 bar as has been said ?

[ian_s]

sorry, i didn't make my thoughts clear, i meant that the increase in the cylinder pressure could be used to hold one stage of the injector closed so it only injects into the pre-chamber.

i also think that this might all be overthinking the problem. the gains of using a single stage, single injector might be enough to warrant using it, even if it is a compromise.

[gruntguru]

Tommy - thanks for picking up the typo - I have corrected the post.

Ian - yeah I think a lot of posters are overthinking this. I am sure a normal DI system could be utilized to achieve the right mixtures in the pre-chamber and main chamber.

[gandharva]

Wow, I can't believe no one here is already talking about that article from Enrico Benzing.

http://www.formula1benzing.eu/

[hollus]

Way, way too many approximations in those graphs. He has his curve models, fits them to measured top speeds (yikes!) and spews "data". No, the cars did not find an extra bar between Montmelo and Monaco. No, power curves are not optimized so that there is more power at 12500rpm than at 10500 rpm. And no, the same curve of power drop cannot apply at different speeds in a fixed gear ratio season (nor does he have any data to fit at 8000rpm in 8th).

Edit: it gets even worse. Which of the power curves in this picture has the same shape as the ones above?

Asnwer: this one!

[gruntguru]

Good point Hollus. The power curves are way too peaky.

[godlameroso]

If you measure power as a result of rpm then yes the curve will be different than if you use speed and an arbitrary gear. Not saying it's not a wild guess because it is, just that a power curve based on vehicle speed is different. Usually when you put a car on a dyno you put the car in 4th or whatever gear gives you direct drive to see the actual engine power curve. If you do the run in an overdrive gear you will get a different curve because torque is being reduced at the point of measurement.

[PlatinumZealot]

U have to neasure accelerarion in some form to get horsepower so that author has to tell how how he measured acceleration... And even that alone is not enough..

[gruntguru]

If you measure power as a result of rpm then yes the curve will be different than if you use speed and an arbitrary gear. Not saying it's not a wild guess because it is, just that a power curve based on vehicle speed is different. Usually when you put a car on a dyno you put the car in 4th or whatever gear gives you direct drive to see the actual engine power curve. If you do the run in an overdrive gear you will get a different curve because torque is being reduced at the point of measurement.

After accounting for losses, you get the same curve regardless of gear. If you use road speed on the x axis (rather than rpm) of course that will stretch the curve left or right but it will be the same curve.

[gandharva]

U have to neasure accelerarion in some form to get horsepower so that author has to tell how how he measured acceleration...

The horsepower is just an approximation. In fact it doesn't even matter here, as it would simply stretch or compress the diagram in y-direction. Those diagrams are not power curves, but acceleration curves based on telemetry data! Therefore, talking about rpm is imho wrong in that context. 8th gear simply was used to rule out traction, which would otherwise have a huge influence in an acceleration diagram.

[jure]

The horsepower is just an approximation. In fact it doesn't even matter here, as it would simply stretch or compress the diagram in y-direction. Those diagrams are not power curves, but acceleration curves based on telemetry data! Therefore, talking about rpm is imho wrong in that context. 8th gear simply was used to rule out traction, which would otherwise have a huge influence in an acceleration diagram.

So if I understand you correctly: y axis: acceleration and x axis: velocity. To me this doesn't make sense because acceleration times speed is proportional to power. Ans such a curve would've been even steeper.
Do above cosworth picture really depicts power vs rpm? or is it torque vs rpm? If the latter, then power vs velocity plot makes sense, because the same follows from cosworth graph (torque*rpm).

I think power vs velocity graph has simply been obtained from gps data. I just don't understand why would anybody want to move to 8th gear already at 210-220kph

[GoranF1]

https://twitter.com/JoseleteF1/status/7 ... 1933146113

[NL_Fer]

For the rules Turbocharger and mgu-h are seperate elements, compressor-turbine is one TC. How is this considered with the Mercedes split TC/MGU-H?

Any gains?

[Jolle]

Reading and writing some stuff in the Honda PU thread, it suddenly struck me.

I think the FIA underestimated the importance of the ICE and the rate of development, especially Mercedes did in chamber design and philosophies.
Going back to one of the early idea's, to have a 1.6 4L engine that could serve several racing series, from WRC, F1, F3, all with different turbo's, electronics, hybrid systems, etc. They thought the 1.6 V6 would be a fairly straightforward simple and cheap design, with the rev limit, not a differentiating factor for the manufacturers. Even with the revs only to 15k at 233cc per cylinder you could have consumer type cam shaft designs and even get away with springs instead of nitro.

The amount of R&D done on the combustion is limitless and for a company as Daimler, it really is without limits. Not only do they already have a ton of R&D on the subject from the truck and diesel subsidiaries, the sheer amount of engineers with expertise on this subject is immense.
This puts any challenger into a big disadvantage or even contending with them impossible. The only company coming close to this might be VW/Audi/Porsche.

A good and easy fix would be to have a standerd kind of combustion chamber, basically one step back. This would dramatically reduce the costs and open up the doors again for BMW, Cosworth and maybe even Ford.

[Brian Coat]

Daimler combustion R&D "...puts any challenger into a big disadvantage or even contending with them impossible. The only company coming close to this might be VW/Audi/Porsche. "

Does anyone share my view that BMW or Ford (cited above) would not have anything much to fear from Stuttgart or Brixworth, with respect to reciprocating engine combustion research capability.