Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[saviour stivala]

There is only 2 possible source of power contributors to the rear wheels, the electrical engine (MGU-K) and the ICE (internal combustion engine), these 2 power outputs can only go to the rear wheels, what goes to the rear wheels will have to go through the gearbox. There are 2 levels of power output from the power unit, the most efficient being MGU-K + ICE with wastegates closed, and the least efficient being ICE with wastegates open in electric supercharging mode and with MGU-K and MGU-H sharing ES power. The GPS output calculation numbers Amus quoted cannot but be as near as could be whichever way they worked them out (ICE power alone) or (power unit power with wasyegates open), if the later see explanation on Walkman’s post. As to believing or not what team members say, everybody is entitled to his opinion, even when believing or not is according to what one would like to hear or not.

[subcritical71]

Indeed, don't know if it is coming from Honda but if is are measured GPS data how can they say Honda spec3 750 HP as the spec 3 has not driven a cm in Monza. So if all values have indeed been measured (based on GPS) and estimated based on wing settings etc. then still the Honda number (for spec 3) can never have been measured in that way.

As well, these are probably peak HP levels at a single RPM. What is really important to know is the area under the HP/Torque curves for the entire usable RPM range.

[Phil]

It's pretty obvious it's coming from Honda since they have the first power prediction for Honda's Spec-3 expected for Austin.

When you read the article, and assuming you understand German, it is more likely that two different sources were used and should not be mixed.

In other words; From the one source, these are the numbers (just the ICU):

Mercedes: 780hp
Ferrari: 790hp
Renault (B-spec): 710hp
Renault (C-spec): 730hp
Honda: 715hp

The claim that the C-spec Honda will be at 750hp is from another (Honda) source and is based what the tests on the dyno are showing them. This engine will most likely debut in Austin.

The article goes on to explain that various factors influence power output. It very much depends if the engine is in "free load mode", e.g. the mode that is used in qualifying. This is explained in the article that when the car is harvesting power through the MGU-H, it is obviously coming at a cost of power. In the max performance mode, obviously, the car is driven with maximum electric power while the ICU is performing at its best without being constrained by having to drive the MGU-H.

Obviously, there is an ideal balance between harvesting and generating power. Not sure it can be assumed all manufacturers strike the same balance and obviously, across the entirety of a lap, there can be differences between engines (i.e. where it is deployed, how much etc). It's a very complex topic with lots of factors which most likely explains why the numbers vary greatly or why, despite Mercedes and Ferrari being quite close according to these numbers, there can still be larger differences in lap-time, assuming similar aero efficiency and drag levels.

[apexcontrol]

If one goes by what one power unit manufacturer boss having been quoted as having said, namely that their power unit have now approached the 1000 BHP output, it means that sort of power output is the maximum they can now extract out of their power unit, which also means that the 1.6l turbo hybrid power output has reached 625bhp/l @ a maximum fuel flow rate of 100kg/h at 10500rpm, it also means that the ICE part of the power unit output has reached 839 bhp or 524 bhp/l, still at 100kg/h fuel flow rate at 10500 rpm.

I wouldn't give to much credit to what team principals say. They talk a lot of rubbish in the media as the day goes along.
I know about the "1000hp" claim but they never made it clear how exactly they meant it.
Wasn't this the same manufacturer which claimed at the end of last year, that they have surpassed 50% thermal efficiency of the PU on dyno runs?
Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp. So one of the two statements must be wrong. Thing is though, 1000hp is just a stupid number where we have no clue how they got to it. Surpassing 50% efficiency is actually a technical achievment and means really the power which is send to the gearbox.
50% would mean somewhere in the 800-900hp region with the support of the MGU-K because they talked about the efficiency of the whole PU. The highest efficency is certainly reached in a normal race mode. Not in Quali mode. The article stated, that the difference between race and quali mode for the ICE can be up to 40hp because of the reduced pumping loses.
Well. 900-160+40=780hp.
So the numbers AMuS stated are perfectly reasonable for the ICE in Quali mode.

So, how they get the 1000hp number you may ask. Well, that's simple, combine all the possible outputs of the ICE and the MGU-K and the MGU-H and you quite certainly get a number higher than 1000hp. So everybody goes "Wow, so much power!", only problem is though, that's not the power send to the gearbox. That's the power the PU can put out as a System.

Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp.

Explain plz. in my book thermal efficiency does not say much about max hp, but how long you can use that power
thermal efficiency refers to harvesting of power

[Snorked]

What I want to know is if the concept is simply being refined, or are they still trying out new things? I think a lot of the reason Honda was so open was due to them trying new things so often that they never got attached to a particular method/design.

Much like they so willingly display the 2017 power unit due to it not having much to do with the 2018 version.

I wonder if things are quiet because the concept is now essentially locked in and the gains come from fuel and refinement of the power unit and it's processes. That if there are hardware changes they are guided by what the fuel is doing moreso than how the engine is breathing. Or perhaps they're more secretive due to Red Bull, wouldn't be a bad move to not prematurely gloat.

Honda currently has a PU exhibition in Japan - though the 2018 unit isn't on display. The previous seasons they first showed off the PU at Suzuka, if that doesn't happen in a few weeks time, I think the openness from Honda is over.

[MMMMMMMM]

Regardless the MGU-H, the maximum you can output through MGU-K is 160 hp.
If Ferrari's ICE alone is at 790hp output => total system output is 950hp. Mark this number.
AMus is stating in the article that these numbers they are giving to us are Qualifying figures in Monza.

First disconnect: I already posted a link to the official Renault site where it is clearly mentioned that their 2018 Spec-A was rated at over 960hp.

Secondly, what they measure on GPS is the time gap, which depends on engine and chassis performance.
Given that AMuS has got the chassis influence right (I don't believe it has, but let's give them that), what they measure is the gap in total engine output. So how do they get to the ICE power figures ?

Well, AMuS explains Quali-mode as: battery fully charged at the beginning of the lap and the system in free load - TC being driven electrically and waste gate wide open, which minimizes back pressure and helps the ICE to reach peak power.

In other words, we're looking at a qualifying lap, where the system output is ICE+160 hp, as simple as that.
What AMuS is telling us is:

Ferrari_____________790+160= 950 hp
Mercedes___________780+160= 940 hp
Renault Spec-C______730+160= 890 hp
Honda Spec-2_______715+160= 875 hp
Renault Spec-B______710+160= 870 hp

AMuS is clearly stating these numbers are in "PS" (Pferdestaerke). One PS is 0.986 HP, for the sake of simplicity I will assume 1 PS=1 HP.

The article goes on to say that there are rumors Honda Spec-3 is scratching 750 hp and that it could debut in Austin.

Last paragraph is dedicated to Abiteboul July's comment (which I personally don't buy) in which he states that in race mode, they are only 15 PS (HP) down on Ferrari and Mercedes. AMuS does NOT contradict Abiteboul, nor do they raise any question on his comments(???!!). They just go on and tell us that although Spec-C brings more power in qualifying, it also has higher reliability risk, something Renault can't afford in their fight for 4th in the Championship.

Let's round-up, the numbers don't reconcile to any previous piece of hard evidence and they only tell us part of the story (Qualifying).
I'd be more interested to have some data on the PU race mode and sustained powered, but I guess we will not be getting that piece of information.

At this point, I'm really looking forward to 2019 to get some answers on the track.

[Tommy Cookers]

Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp.

Explain plz. in my book thermal efficiency does not say much about max hp, but how long you can use that power
thermal efficiency refers to harvesting of power

no
TE is the percentage of the fuel's chemical energy (heat) that is turned into mechanical energy (work)
the power (work rate) = TE x the fuel rate x the lower heating value of the fuel
the best TE might not be at the max fuel rate but we can be sure the max power is at the max fuel rate
stored energy isn't counted as it's energy that originated from the ICE and mustn't be counted twice

[Brake Horse Power]

I think to determine thermal efficiency you need to know:

Potential power = Fuel flow rate (known)x Fuel energy density (unknown)

And relate it to

Power output (unknown, several estimates above)

If the fuel energy density is a lot higher than estimated, it might be possible to have i.e. 1000hp at 50% Thermal efficiency?

Edit: Sorry double kind of post. I didnt see Tommy Cookers post yet

[Dr. Acula]

Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp.

Explain plz. in my book thermal efficiency does not say much about max hp, but how long you can use that power
thermal efficiency refers to harvesting of power

no
TE is the percentage of the fuel's chemical energy (heat) that is turned into mechanical energy (work)
the power (work rate) = TE x the fuel rate x the lower heating value of the fuel
the best TE might not be at the max fuel rate but we can be sure the max power is at the max fuel rate
stored energy isn't counted as it's energy that originated from the ICE and mustn't be counted twice

That's exactly how it is.
Everybody can look up the lower heating value of normal Gasoline. Depending where you search for it you can find values between 40 and 43.5MJ/kg. The stuff they use in F1 has maybe a slightly higher value. But Let's go with 43.5MJ/kg first. Max fuel flow is 100kg/h and we have 50% efficiency. (Btw. Mercedes stated, the whole PU as a package has surpassed 50% TE. This means the poweroutput of the MGU-K adds to this. The ICE alone isn't even near 50% efficiency.)



So as everybody can see, not even close to 1000hp.
If we add 1% to the efficiency and say the fuel has a lower heating value of 45MJ/kg, we would end up with about 867hp. So now we are in the same ballpark as the AMuS power values if we subtract the MGU-K power and add 40hp because they wrote about the ICE power output in quali mode with open wastegates.

Merc has reached more than 50% TE already at the end of last year. They could be very well slightly more efficient now. So if we think about all this, the AMuS values are probably not perfectly exact, but quite realistic.

[Walkman]

Isn't max fuel flow 105kg/h ?

[subcritical71]

Isn't max fuel flow 105kg/h ?

Max fuel load is 105 kg, max flow rate is 100 kg/hr.

[godlameroso]

If one goes by what one power unit manufacturer boss having been quoted as having said, namely that their power unit have now approached the 1000 BHP output, it means that sort of power output is the maximum they can now extract out of their power unit, which also means that the 1.6l turbo hybrid power output has reached 625bhp/l @ a maximum fuel flow rate of 100kg/h at 10500rpm, it also means that the ICE part of the power unit output has reached 839 bhp or 524 bhp/l, still at 100kg/h fuel flow rate at 10500 rpm.

I wouldn't give to much credit to what team principals say. They talk a lot of rubbish in the media as the day goes along.
I know about the "1000hp" claim but they never made it clear how exactly they meant it.
Wasn't this the same manufacturer which claimed at the end of last year, that they have surpassed 50% thermal efficiency of the PU on dyno runs?
Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp. So one of the two statements must be wrong. Thing is though, 1000hp is just a stupid number where we have no clue how they got to it. Surpassing 50% efficiency is actually a technical achievment and means really the power which is send to the gearbox.
50% would mean somewhere in the 800-900hp region with the support of the MGU-K because they talked about the efficiency of the whole PU. The highest efficency is certainly reached in a normal race mode. Not in Quali mode. The article stated, that the difference between race and quali mode for the ICE can be up to 40hp because of the reduced pumping loses.
Well. 900-160+40=780hp.
So the numbers AMuS stated are perfectly reasonable for the ICE in Quali mode.

So, how they get the 1000hp number you may ask. Well, that's simple, combine all the possible outputs of the ICE and the MGU-K and the MGU-H and you quite certainly get a number higher than 1000hp. So everybody goes "Wow, so much power!", only problem is though, that's not the power send to the gearbox. That's the power the PU can put out as a System.

Depends on the properties of the fuel don't you think? If the fuel has more energy you make more power for a given efficiency right? Fuel is the thing we are burning to make things happen.

[saviour stivala]

Yes, but one shouldn’t give too much credit to what team principals say when it is not what one would like to hear/read.

[AJI]

Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp.

Explain plz. in my book thermal efficiency does not say much about max hp, but how long you can use that power
thermal efficiency refers to harvesting of power

no
TE is the percentage of the fuel's chemical energy (heat) that is turned into mechanical energy (work)
the power (work rate) = TE x the fuel rate x the lower heating value of the fuel
the best TE might not be at the max fuel rate but we can be sure the max power is at the max fuel rate
stored energy isn't counted as it's energy that originated from the ICE and mustn't be counted twice

That's exactly how it is.
Everybody can look up the lower heating value of normal Gasoline. Depending where you search for it you can find values between 40 and 43.5MJ/kg. The stuff they use in F1 has maybe a slightly higher value. But Let's go with 43.5MJ/kg first. Max fuel flow is 100kg/h and we have 50% efficiency. (Btw. Mercedes stated, the whole PU as a package has surpassed 50% TE. This means the poweroutput of the MGU-K adds to this. The ICE alone isn't even near 50% efficiency.)



So as everybody can see, not even close to 1000hp.
If we add 1% to the efficiency and say the fuel has a lower heating value of 45MJ/kg, we would end up with about 867hp. So now we are in the same ballpark as the AMuS power values if we subtract the MGU-K power and add 40hp because they wrote about the ICE power output in quali mode with open wastegates.

Merc has reached more than 50% TE already at the end of last year. They could be very well slightly more efficient now. So if we think about all this, the AMuS values are probably not perfectly exact, but quite realistic.

In 2015 Andy Cowell was quoted saying something like 'his aim was to extract all 1240kW out of the fuel'. I can't remember the exact quote (I think it's in an RE article, I'll try and find it) but the number was definitely 1240, so we can assume the Petronas fuel had an energy density of 44.64MJ/kg in 2015, which is perfectly reasonable for F1 fuel.
So, at 50%TE you get 620kW or ~831hp(i) (or ~843hp(m), if you're chasing numbers, which the marketing guys are...) We have to assume this figure is based on operating in 'free-load' mode.
Add 120kW or ~161hp(e) for the K and either way you get close enough to 1000 to call it 1000.

I really wish everyone just spoke in Watts...

[henry]

Well there's already a problem, 50% thermal efficiency, isn't even near 1000hp.

Explain plz. in my book thermal efficiency does not say much about max hp, but how long you can use that power
thermal efficiency refers to harvesting of power

no
TE is the percentage of the fuel's chemical energy (heat) that is turned into mechanical energy (work)
the power (work rate) = TE x the fuel rate x the lower heating value of the fuel
the best TE might not be at the max fuel rate but we can be sure the max power is at the max fuel rate
stored energy isn't counted as it's energy that originated from the ICE and mustn't be counted twice

That's exactly how it is.
Everybody can look up the lower heating value of normal Gasoline. Depending where you search for it you can find values between 40 and 43.5MJ/kg. The stuff they use in F1 has maybe a slightly higher value. But Let's go with 43.5MJ/kg first. Max fuel flow is 100kg/h and we have 50% efficiency. (Btw. Mercedes stated, the whole PU as a package has surpassed 50% TE. This means the poweroutput of the MGU-K adds to this. The ICE alone isn't even near 50% efficiency.)



So as everybody can see, not even close to 1000hp.
If we add 1% to the efficiency and say the fuel has a lower heating value of 45MJ/kg, we would end up with about 867hp. So now we are in the same ballpark as the AMuS power values if we subtract the MGU-K power and add 40hp because they wrote about the ICE power output in quali mode with open wastegates.

Merc has reached more than 50% TE already at the end of last year. They could be very well slightly more efficient now. So if we think about all this, the AMuS values are probably not perfectly exact, but quite realistic.

You may add the MGU-H output to the ICE crank power. This is the highest self-sustaining output, I.e. no ES support.

Peak power always depends on some ES support.

Your impost might be interpreted that the full MGU-K, 120KW, may be added.