Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[saviour stivala]

"Strategy is to aim for constant power output from 10500rpm up" Yes of coarse, because that is the max power speed. which means above or past the max power speed (10500rpm) the power unite (ICE) cannot produce any additional power output.

[Singabule]

Telemetry comparison between top qualifiers in Australia.

https://unendinginsight.wordpress.com/2 ... -analysis/

https://unendinginsight.files.wordpress ... vs_ver.png

Immediately evident is the strong straightline speeds by the Red Bull with it’s new Honda PU, a sign that Honda has made some good progress. However, it’s likely that the Red Bull was running less downforce to help with this straightline speed as it is much slower in the high speed T11-12/T15, and may also explain why Verstappen brakes earlier than Hamilton multiple times. The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do.

Unlike the Ferrari, and perhaps with less downforce, the Red Bull doesn’t need to brake for T4 and T14, though it is difficult to determine whether this is driver style or car characteristic dependent. Relative to Mercedes the Red Bull remains close in slow corners and perhaps gets closer even near the end of the lap, possibly a sign that it keeps its tyres in good condition throughout the lap.

Wow merc engine and transmission is working seamlessly on downshift and they can hit trottle very early, no wonder Marko hits out at RB

[Jaisonas]

You're comparing a engine-trans combo thats been developed for at least 5 years to one thats been for 4-5 months. Ofcourse its gonna be better.

[henry]

Telemetry comparison between top qualifiers in Australia.

https://unendinginsight.wordpress.com/2 ... -analysis/

https://unendinginsight.files.wordpress ... vs_ver.png

Immediately evident is the strong straightline speeds by the Red Bull with it’s new Honda PU, a sign that Honda has made some good progress. However, it’s likely that the Red Bull was running less downforce to help with this straightline speed as it is much slower in the high speed T11-12/T15, and may also explain why Verstappen brakes earlier than Hamilton multiple times. The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do.

Unlike the Ferrari, and perhaps with less downforce, the Red Bull doesn’t need to brake for T4 and T14, though it is difficult to determine whether this is driver style or car characteristic dependent. Relative to Mercedes the Red Bull remains close in slow corners and perhaps gets closer even near the end of the lap, possibly a sign that it keeps its tyres in good condition throughout the lap.

Very interesting post. Lots of time lost under braking. Driver? Aero? Chassis?

I think the statement “The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do“ is the exact opposite of how things are. If Honda can make power at lower RPM that’s good not bad. More revs good is not the way to go with these PU. IMHO.

[Webber2011]

Telemetry comparison between top qualifiers in Australia.

https://unendinginsight.wordpress.com/2 ... -analysis/

https://unendinginsight.files.wordpress ... vs_ver.png

Immediately evident is the strong straightline speeds by the Red Bull with it’s new Honda PU, a sign that Honda has made some good progress. However, it’s likely that the Red Bull was running less downforce to help with this straightline speed as it is much slower in the high speed T11-12/T15, and may also explain why Verstappen brakes earlier than Hamilton multiple times. The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do.

Unlike the Ferrari, and perhaps with less downforce, the Red Bull doesn’t need to brake for T4 and T14, though it is difficult to determine whether this is driver style or car characteristic dependent. Relative to Mercedes the Red Bull remains close in slow corners and perhaps gets closer even near the end of the lap, possibly a sign that it keeps its tyres in good condition throughout the lap.

Very interesting post. Lots of time lost under braking. Driver? Aero? Chassis?

I think the statement “The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do“ is the exact opposite of how things are. If Honda can make power at lower RPM that’s good not bad. More revs good is not the way to go with these PU. IMHO.

Excellent Post.
Cheers

[Juzh]

Telemetry comparison between top qualifiers in Australia.

https://unendinginsight.wordpress.com/2 ... -analysis/

https://unendinginsight.files.wordpress ... vs_ver.png

Immediately evident is the strong straightline speeds by the Red Bull with it’s new Honda PU, a sign that Honda has made some good progress. However, it’s likely that the Red Bull was running less downforce to help with this straightline speed as it is much slower in the high speed T11-12/T15, and may also explain why Verstappen brakes earlier than Hamilton multiple times. The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do.

Unlike the Ferrari, and perhaps with less downforce, the Red Bull doesn’t need to brake for T4 and T14, though it is difficult to determine whether this is driver style or car characteristic dependent. Relative to Mercedes the Red Bull remains close in slow corners and perhaps gets closer even near the end of the lap, possibly a sign that it keeps its tyres in good condition throughout the lap.

Very interesting post. Lots of time lost under braking. Driver? Aero? Chassis?

I think the statement “The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do“ is the exact opposite of how things are. If Honda can make power at lower RPM that’s good not bad. More revs good is not the way to go with these PU. IMHO.

Charts and all that is great, but anything regarding RPM in that analysis is flawed and should not be taken seriously, as it the whole thing about tyre saving trouhgout the lap. All it matters is you keep the engine in the operating window of max fuel flow (10.5k+ rpm), everything else is arguing semantics really. 6 years running now and still people cling onto the old NA engines philosophy of more RPM is always better. Even then rpm weren't be all and end all, 2006 20k cosworth anybody?


As for the time lost under braking, it makes sense you have to brake earlier when you're down of DF levels, it's just the way it it goes. mercedes was simply the best car in melbourne and it wasn't even close, not even with red bull.

I also think that, while honda did make signifficant progress one way or another, red bull and in particular TR cutting down on DF flattered them on the straights to a degree on that track. RB basically made a 180 U turn, they went from absolutely being the best in high speed section T11-12 last year, to now being behind merc, ferrari, haas maybe even alfa romeo. Yes, other aspects of their chassis still made them far superior compared to most of those cars, but in terms of pure aero performance they were far down from what is ussually the case.

[PowerandtheGlory]

Excellent Post with the telemetry. The Merc engine noticeably 'rev'ier' than the Honda. But most interesting is how Hamilton seems to be able to keep the throttle half open in T11, T14 and T15-16 which in turn sees the Merc engine Rev earlier and freer in the straights that follow which increases the KPH figure across that section of the track. Very Senna-Esque who used to famously 'stab' the accelerator mid corner in the old turbo days to keep the turbine spinning. Not sure the newer turbo need that sort of thing, but hamilton is effectively on throttle more of the time. And the RB loses Time Delta throughout the whole lap after T1.. def down on Aero as the RB doesn't make any 'real' gains rest of the lap.

[Bence]

Very interesting post. Lots of time lost under braking. Driver? Aero? Chassis?

I think the statement “The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do“ is the exact opposite of how things are. If Honda can make power at lower RPM that’s good not bad. More revs good is not the way to go with these PU. IMHO.

Yup, and we can remember the sausage-turboed 615 & 616 has hit 12.500 - 12.800 all the time.

[subcritical71]

Also notice that both engines RPM increase momentarily (blips) while off throttle and no throttle input. Not as pronounced as what I would have expected but the resolution of the data is also not that high.

[PowerandtheGlory]

Also notice that both engines RPM increase momentarily (blips) while off throttle and no throttle input. Not as pronounced as what I would have expected but the resolution of the data is also not that high.

https://i.imgur.com/VKjYF6i.png

Agreed, the Merc Engine seems to rev 'freer' a bit like on a road car engine which has done 5K miles vs one that's loosened up and done about 50K, the revs dying a bit quicker when the throttle is off. Not sure what the engine is doing to achieve this, the normal scavenging process must be more efficient on the MERC. Hats off again to the Merc guys...

[subcritical71]

Also notice that both engines RPM increase momentarily (blips) while off throttle and no throttle input. Not as pronounced as what I would have expected but the resolution of the data is also not that high.

https://i.imgur.com/VKjYF6i.png

Agreed, the Merc Engine seems to rev 'freer' a bit like on a road car engine which has done 5K miles vs one that's loosened up and done about 50K, the revs dying a bit quicker when the throttle is off. Not sure what the engine is doing to achieve this, the normal scavenging process must be more efficient on the MERC. Hats off again to the Merc guys...

Well, I didn't seem to look at my own graphic enough... that is the downshift blip

[PowerandtheGlory]

Looking at Ham Vs Vett. The ferrari engine is far less sensitive to being off throttle than the Honda and in fact before T13 achieves Higher top speed. But the data shows hamilton 'hangs on' the gear longer in T4 & T5 and then in T13 and T15. Not sure why Vettel short shifts in these sections but it doesn't hurt the car in the speed. The ferrari seems to lose chunk of time at the apexes of T4, T6 and T9. the Merc has 5 Kph on its engine and the delta shows the troughs in the time every time the Ferrari gets to an apex. Merc have got a really stable car in the medium speed corners, and if this is the pattern for the rest of the year then Ferrari should be worried. I just wonder if Ferrari's Aero is stalling in the medium corners as the car is turning and its causing the car to lose apex speed. This might be the one weakness of the FW aero concept. Facinating data to analyze.

[SmallSoldier]

Telemetry comparison between top qualifiers in Australia.

https://unendinginsight.wordpress.com/2 ... -analysis/

https://unendinginsight.files.wordpress ... vs_ver.png

Very interesting post. Lots of time lost under braking. Driver? Aero? Chassis?

I think the statement “The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do“ is the exact opposite of how things are. If Honda can make power at lower RPM that’s good not bad. More revs good is not the way to go with these PU. IMHO.

Charts and all that is great, but anything regarding RPM in that analysis is flawed and should not be taken seriously, as it the whole thing about tyre saving trouhgout the lap. All it matters is you keep the engine in the operating window of max fuel flow (10.5k+ rpm), everything else is arguing semantics really. 6 years running now and still people cling onto the old NA engines philosophy of more RPM is always better. Even then rpm weren't be all and end all, 2006 20k cosworth anybody?


As for the time lost under braking, it makes sense you have to brake earlier when you're down of DF levels, it's just the way it it goes. mercedes was simply the best car in melbourne and it wasn't even close, not even with red bull.

I also think that, while honda did make signifficant progress one way or another, red bull and in particular TR cutting down on DF flattered them on the straights to a degree on that track. RB basically made a 180 U turn, they went from absolutely being the best in high speed section T11-12 last year, to now being behind merc, ferrari, haas maybe even alfa romeo. Yes, other aspects of their chassis still made them far superior compared to most of those cars, but in terms of pure aero performance they were far down from what is ussually the case.

There is a direct correlation between RPM and horsepower... NA engines will produce more Horsepower at higher RPM.

Horsepower = RPM x Torque / 5250

The problem with Turbocharged cars is the ability to maintain boost at higher RPM, since the Turbo is limited in the amount of air volume it can direct towards the intake... This engines are also limited in the amount of fuel they can use which will also limit how high they can rev them up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ispano6]

Excellent Post with the telemetry. The Merc engine noticeably 'rev'ier' than the Honda. But most interesting is how Hamilton seems to be able to keep the throttle half open in T11, T14 and T15-16 which in turn sees the Merc engine Rev earlier and freer in the straights that follow which increases the KPH figure across that section of the track. Very Senna-Esque who used to famously 'stab' the accelerator mid corner in the old turbo days to keep the turbine spinning. Not sure the newer turbo need that sort of thing, but hamilton is effectively on throttle more of the time. And the RB loses Time Delta throughout the whole lap after T1.. def down on Aero as the RB doesn't make any 'real' gains rest of the lap.

In Australia the Honda sounded like an F note, the Merc sounded like an A note, with noticeably higher revs. Honda will need to tweak their system to more closely emulate what Merc are doing, which is probably using the extra fuel allowance to run slightly higher rpms for the benefit of the turbo and ers systems to generate more all the time. Honda is looking after efficiency and probably not yet fully tapping into the extra fuel potential.

I haven't looked at the data to see if anything could be explained by cylinder deactivation or lift and coasting but Max braking early is likely intentional so as to not get too close and/or overheat the front tires.

[hurril]

Telemetry comparison between top qualifiers in Australia.

https://unendinginsight.wordpress.com/2 ... -analysis/

https://unendinginsight.files.wordpress ... vs_ver.png

Very interesting post. Lots of time lost under braking. Driver? Aero? Chassis?

I think the statement “The RPM of the Honda PU is also significantly and quite consistently lower than that of the Mercedes PU so Honda still appears to have a good amount of work to do“ is the exact opposite of how things are. If Honda can make power at lower RPM that’s good not bad. More revs good is not the way to go with these PU. IMHO.

Charts and all that is great, but anything regarding RPM in that analysis is flawed and should not be taken seriously, as it the whole thing about tyre saving trouhgout the lap. All it matters is you keep the engine in the operating window of max fuel flow (10.5k+ rpm), everything else is arguing semantics really. 6 years running now and still people cling onto the old NA engines philosophy of more RPM is always better. Even then rpm weren't be all and end all, 2006 20k cosworth anybody?


As for the time lost under braking, it makes sense you have to brake earlier when you're down of DF levels, it's just the way it it goes. mercedes was simply the best car in melbourne and it wasn't even close, not even with red bull.

I also think that, while honda did make signifficant progress one way or another, red bull and in particular TR cutting down on DF flattered them on the straights to a degree on that track. RB basically made a 180 U turn, they went from absolutely being the best in high speed section T11-12 last year, to now being behind merc, ferrari, haas maybe even alfa romeo. Yes, other aspects of their chassis still made them far superior compared to most of those cars, but in terms of pure aero performance they were far down from what is ussually the case.

No anything about the RPM chart is not flawed just because. More RPM produces more gass volume which might be beneficial for the MGU-h. What if they run the turbine with more wastegate to reduce backpressure because that will produce more crankshaft output and compensate the loss of regeneration somewhat with some more RPM. We don't know any of this so let's not get all macho over what is semantic and what isn't.