2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[saviour stivala]

Yes. My previous post was not considering ES (electric supercharger) mode at all - simply pointing out that the F1 turbine operates using a combination of energy extracted in two ways.

1. Elevated average exhaust pressure (with associated pumping loss during the exhaust stroke)
2. Blowdown energy. Applying the higher-than-average pressure pulse (which travels down the runner when the exhaust valve opens and the piston is still travelling downwards on power stroke) directly to the turbine wheel. This is free energy with no associated losses in the piston engine.

Yes. While some things have been left out, could be having been convenient to have been left out. A hell of a lot of others also could have been convenient to have been added to the original argumentation as to whether the turbocharger exhaust turbine as used in formula one is a ‘pressure turbine’ or a ‘blow-down turbine’.

[godlameroso]

One thing I've noticed, the collectors are relatively far away from the turbine inlets. Further than I would place them in a conventional setup.

Normally your collector would bolt up to the turbine housing.

[hollus]

‘’It is possible for ‘’pressure’’ pulses and reflections to travel up <B> and down the main pipe and its branches with very little interference <B>’’. So you are saying that the turbocharger turbine as used in formula one is a ‘’pressure turbine’’, which means it is not a ‘’blow-down turbine’’ as per your original claim.

He is saying that it is a "pressure turbine" and also, at the same time, a "blow-down turbine". The pressure turbine is pretty much implied the moment you have a turbo.

[hollus]

Yes. My previous post was not considering ES (electric supercharger) mode at all - simply pointing out that the F1 turbine operates using a combination of energy extracted in two ways.

1. Elevated average exhaust pressure (with associated pumping loss during the exhaust stroke)
2. Blowdown energy. Applying the higher-than-average pressure pulse (which travels down the runner when the exhaust valve opens and the piston is still travelling downwards on power stroke) directly to the turbine wheel. This is free energy with no associated losses in the piston engine.

Yes. While some things have been left out, could be having been convenient to have been left out. A hell of a lot of others also could have been convenient to have been added to the original argumentation as to whether the turbocharger exhaust turbine as used in formula one is a ‘pressure turbine’ or a ‘blow-down turbine’.

Once more. It doesn't have to be or. It can be and.

[gruntguru]

. . the original argumentation as to whether the turbocharger exhaust turbine as used in formula one is a ‘pressure turbine’ or a ‘blow-down turbine’.

It is not useful to categorise the turbine as a "pressure" or "blowdown" turbine. The term "blowdown turbine" has been used to describe machines designed to harness blowdown impulses without restricting the flow of exhaust gas. The F1 turbine is not one of these. It does however, harness a large percentage of the blowdown energy, enabling it to operate at much lower back-pressure than would be possible using steady exhaust flow alone (imagine all six cylinders feeding a common manifold).

[saviour stivala]

Yes. A blow-down type of turbine will not impinge on cylinder scavenging. On the other hand a pressure turbine will impinge negatively on cylinders scavenging irrespective if it makes use or not of blow-down pulses. And also irrespective of the amount of cylinder scavenging it eliminates by clever design. Now having said all that for maybe the thousand-time, the actual fact is the type of turbine used in formula one allows the power unit software to extract the most possible power only when the compressor is in electric supercharging mode with waste-gates fully open and exhaust gasses are bypassing the turbine. That is only possible because with waste-gate open and exhaust gasses are bypassing the turbine exhaust gasses pressure energy are rendered into atmospheric pressure. And so the pressure turbine is not impinging negatively on cylinder scavenging any more.

[Tommy Cookers]

the NACA was in the 1940s using the term 'blowdown turbine' ..... where .....
(BT) exit pressure was higher than ambient eg 35" Hg
NACA Technical Note TN 1447 Oct 1047
NACA Technical Report TR 786 Dec 1944

1447 at 35" MAP & BT geared to 2800 engine (via mechanical supercharger stage) passing exhaust gas at eg 35" to ....
'steady flow' turbine geared to engine (via other mechanical supercharger stage)

for 35" MAP BT recovery is c. 100 hp @ all altitudes and SFT recovery c. 0 hp @ 0' alt - 450 hp @ 45000' alt

[NL_Fer]

https://www.racefans.net/2020/10/27/red ... ne-freeze/

So it seems after Monday’s meeting Merc, Redbull and Renault support a 2022 development freeze, but Ferrari does not. Obviously maranello’s engineers are afraid, they cannot regain the lost performance before 2022. Frantz Tost suggested a balance of performance by adjusting the fuel flows.

Wouldn’t it be ironic, if Ferrari would be allowed to legally run with a higher fuel flow again, like they did past years

[saviour stivala]

Why should red bull be accommodated by introducing an engine development freeze when FI already has rules in place to ensure they will receive a supply of engines?.

[saviour stivala]

It looks like/sounds like red bull believes that Honda might be willing to keep producing and supplying their power unit to them, but are not willing to undertake any further development. I do not know if that will be for free or at commercial rates, but I don’t believe that Honda is willing to give or sell their power unit IP to anybody. Let alone red bull or any third party producing/manufacturing the Honda power unit themselves.

"In May, red bull told us (FIA) that under no circumstances should there be a stop on development of the engine, because otherwise Honda would stop. Now they want the opposite. It can go fast in this business. I respect every opinion and every request, but I will not be blackmailed, I will not be blackmailed by anybody". Jean Todd speaking to auto motor und sport.

[godlameroso]

Looks like they've been playing with additives in oil to reduce knocking for quite some time. Color me stupid.

[mzso]

V8 Supercars use a hp limit rule without issue, all engine packages are homologated on the organiser's dyno and must comply with given maximum cumulative power over the useful rpm range. Engine components cannot be changed from the homologated parts, without redynoing and rehomologating.

This rule allows for 4-5 different engine suppliers in the field, but all with interchangable performance. When engine performance was unrestricted, they would use lightweight pistons which developed cracks after one to two race meetings... That is just a waste of money wouldn't you say? Meanwhile, the homologated engines with minimum weights for pistons & conrods can run easily for 5500km and rarely see engine failures.

Actually limiting the power is a really good idea in my opinion (I also had it). It would shift development towards more efficient PUs (and lighter ones without a weight lower limit)
It seems exceedingly silly to me to regulate screws and bores and almost every measure of an engine to get to some power goal, instead of just setting a power cap. They could just open up almost everything (cost permitting) with a power cap, starting with fuel flow limits, so we could have a variety of engines.

What problem is this solving?

Most things engine related.

[mzso]

https://www.racefans.net/2020/10/27/red ... ne-freeze/

So it seems after Monday’s meeting Merc, Redbull and Renault support a 2022 development freeze, but Ferrari does not. Obviously maranello’s engineers are afraid, they cannot regain the lost performance before 2022. Frantz Tost suggested a balance of performance by adjusting the fuel flows.

Wouldn’t it be ironic, if Ferrari would be allowed to legally run with a higher fuel flow again, like they did past years

There's no chance in hell Mercedes will support a BOP regulation. Ferrari probably won't allow any freeze either. (They just had to give them veto rights, again...)
Anyway. They (Ferrari CEO or chairman if memory serves) claimed that the FIA can unilaterally introduce a development freeze for 2023. I think that will happen and Red Bull will suffer the financial burden of one more year of ex-Honda PU development. Unless Honda just says no, than the whole freeze becomes pointless.

[mzso]

I didn't watch F1 2007-2013 because it was astoundingly boring.

You missed the best seasons in the last 2 decades
2007
2008
2009
2010
2012

All were great seasons

Meh. 2007 and 2009 were at least memorable. No 98/99 though.

[mzso]

https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-and ... SocialSnap


First time in a long time that Gary Anderson made good sense....

Meaning he agrees with you. I don't think there's any chance going backwards to more dated tech will happen.