2021 Engine thread

[ENGINE TUNER]

No they didn't. Audi ran the Williams flywheel, but they switched to batteries due to weight, power density and capacity.
Porsche always used batteries. Toyota used to run super caps. But for this season everyone of them chose batteries.

Yes, thank you for the correction, Porsche ran the flywheel in their hybrid 911 GT3 which was faster than the regular GT3(becuz AWD!)

I agree that they changed for capacity, but not for weight or power density.

[gruntguru]

The I4 was considered the best solution in the original turbo era . .

Really? Renault, Honda, Cosworth . . . although I do agree I4 would be a better solution in the present formula. In fact if cylinder count and displacement were free with all other rules unchanged, I think the solution would be approx 1.0 litre I3.

[wuzak]

My take on what the 2021 PU rules should be

1.6L Turbo I4 (because every major car maker on the planet makes one)
unlimited energy recovery(all wheels)
no batteries allowed, only electromechanical system allowed(williams fly wheel and the like) and only 2 allowed per season
laser ignition allowed(or any type the manufacturers want)
any type of valve train allowed
water injection allowed(yes including the coolant fluid)
no refueling
no race max fuel allotment
75kg/hr max fuel rate

CVT allowed(yes I know)

thoughts?

Let's see - you have unlimited energy recovery. What about energy usage?

If energy usage is unlimited, then may I suggest that they utilise electric drive with constant speed engine?

That way the engine runs at its optimum performance the entire race, while the electric machines take care of varying the vehicle speed.

[wuzak]

The I4 was considered the best solution in the original turbo era, and if all layouts were allowed the I4 is what they would all converge upon(unless maybe the I3 would be a better solution). That is why the I4. Turbo because it is also the best and most efficient solution, but if they want some other type of forced induction that would be allowed.

The BMW I4 turbo won 9 races between 1982 and 1986.

In that time 89 races were run.

Cosworth V8 won 11 races in 1982 and 1983, and was only in lower teams from then on.

V6s won 59 races.

The BMW I4 continued in 1987, and was raced in 1987 and 1988 as the Megatron. That's 32 more races V6s won in those seasons.

Zakspeed raced an I4T from 1985 to 1988 with no success. Hart raced an I4T from 1981 to 1986 with no success.

Alfa Romeo ran a V8T with no success from 1983 to 1988 (1988 as Osella).

V6 turbos were raced by Renault, Ferrari, TAG, Honda, Ford (Cosworth), Motori Moderni

[wuzak]

And I would point out that while the I4 theoretically should give more power than the V6 in a fuel limited formula, the V6 may be better for chassis integration.

Note also that the Porsche 919 uses a V4.

[wuzak]

For me F1 engines should not be bound by any requirement for "road relevance" - Touring car / WRC racing takes care of that.
Electric motors would be outlawed - Formula E takes care of that.
Engines should only need to last for 1 race weekend.

My 2021 engine rules would be as follows:
Fuel tank capacity - 250kg;
Fuel - Petrol;
Engine size - Any up to 2000cc;
No rev limit;
No minimum weight;
No fuel flow limit;
Engine layout - Any layout would be acceptable (rotary anyone?);
N/A, Turbo charging, Super charging are all acceptable forms of induction;
Any material can be used (ceramic, magnesium, exotic alien meteor alloy!);
Mechanical energy recovery systems would be allowed.

Basically, the only limiting factor would be the max. engine size & fuel tank capacity.

In which case you will migrate to the engines which are more efficient (ie turbos), and horrendously powerful qualifying modes.

[dobbster71]

I think that it would attract more engine makers into F1. There would probably be different layouts & maybe even a supercharged & turbo charged engine.

I truly believe that variety is the spice of life & variety would certainly spice up F1.

[godlameroso]

No they didn't. Audi ran the Williams flywheel, but they switched to batteries due to weight, power density and capacity.
Porsche always used batteries. Toyota used to run super caps. But for this season everyone of them chose batteries.

Yes, thank you for the correction, Porsche ran the flywheel in their hybrid 911 GT3 which was faster than the regular GT3(becuz AWD!)

I agree that they changed for capacity, but not for weight or power density.

It took Audi nearly 2 years to get a reliable flywheel system, and the best they could muster was 4MJ around LeMans or around 3MJ per lap of an F1 grade circuit.

[Holm86]

No they didn't. Audi ran the Williams flywheel, but they switched to batteries due to weight, power density and capacity.
Porsche always used batteries. Toyota used to run super caps. But for this season everyone of them chose batteries.

Yes, thank you for the correction, Porsche ran the flywheel in their hybrid 911 GT3 which was faster than the regular GT3(becuz AWD!)

I agree that they changed for capacity, but not for weight or power density.

It took Audi nearly 2 years to get a reliable flywheel system, and the best they could muster was 4MJ around LeMans or around 3MJ per lap of an F1 grade circuit.

Theres also the gyroscopic effect of the flywheel to be considered. The flywheel is efficient, but might not be the best option for a racecar which changes direction all the time. And the capacity is also not the best.

[Tommy Cookers]

It took Audi nearly 2 years to get a reliable flywheel system, and the best they could muster was 4MJ around LeMans or around 3MJ per lap of an F1 grade circuit.

Theres also the gyroscopic effect of the flywheel to be considered. The flywheel is efficient, but might not be the best option for a racecar which changes direction all the time. And the capacity is also not the best.

the gyroscopic effects could readily be benign overall
eg afaik a flywheel rotating about a transverse axis ('backwards' relative to the road wheels) would benefit by .....
opposing the usual overturning moment occurring with cornering ie improving the lateral distribution of tyre contact loads
though the price of this is working the front tyres harder, hopefully there is an overall benefit

the flywheel rotating about a vertical axis would produce minimal effects, or of course there could be 2 flywheels in opposite rotation

what arrangements were actually used ? (I wonder)

PS otoh - do we need to know the rpm of eg the above 4 MJ system to calculate some gyroscopic torque effects ?
and was the '50,000 - 100,000 rpm' Williams system linked in the following post by Paul an N/A era F1 system (ie under 0.5 MJ ?)

[Paul]

This article suggests a single flywheel for Williams system.

[WaikeCU]

I would say:

- Turbocharged V8 engine
- Electric Recovery System (ERS)
- Electric Engine
- No refueling
- Electric drive in pitlane
- Exhaust tip points at a 130° angle upwards

[FPV GTHO]

And I would point out that while the I4 theoretically should give more power than the V6 in a fuel limited formula, the V6 may be better for chassis integration.

Note also that the Porsche 919 uses a V4.

The V format is far better in this regard. Having an inline 6 was one of the major downfalls of Aston Martins aborted LMP1 effort, and also a major reason in moving away from the I4 for the proposed 2013 engines. The inline engines wouldve needed a subframe to keep the engine as a stressed member, meaning alot more weight.

[wuzak]

And I would point out that while the I4 theoretically should give more power than the V6 in a fuel limited formula, the V6 may be better for chassis integration.

Note also that the Porsche 919 uses a V4.

The V format is far better in this regard. Having an inline 6 was one of the major downfalls of Aston Martins aborted LMP1 effort, and also a major reason in moving away from the I4 for the proposed 2013 engines. The inline engines wouldve needed a subframe to keep the engine as a stressed member, meaning alot more weight.

Certainly it wasn't just Ferrari pushing for the V6. Newey was also said to be pushing for the V6, evidently because he thought it could be packaged better.

Also, I have not seen an estimated difference in power between a V6 and an I4 - is it 10hp, 50hp or 100hp?

[NL_Fer]

So from a v6 vs i4 the first is better packaged in an F1 car, But how if we compare a V4 vs an i3 and about 1.0l displacement. How does it compare than?

Will a V4 still be a good stressed member or does the weight advantage of the i3 compensate for the extra subframe?