Honda F1 project leader Yusuke Hasegawa has outlined a number of reasons why Honda has been struggling so badly in the beginning of the 2017 Formula One season. He confirmed that lots of problems were not discovered while running on the dynamo meter.
I think we should all be able to guess.PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 04:37News from our Japanese members has dried up. To not get reprimanded I wont say why. Ha.
I'm glad it was put in lockdown, but I'm also happy you revived it. In some sections this is the most amazing speculative thread on the site.Thunder wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 07:17Why does this Thread need 2 new Pages every Day? If there's nothing on Topic to Discuss there is nothing to Discuss. It's that simple. And after over 900 Pages quite understandable. I'd rather have 5 quality Posts per Week in here than 5 quality posts buried by 50 Off Topic Comments that add nothing to the Discussion.McMika98 wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 06:49The thread is a ghosttown now, only thing interesting talked in PU world is in the Ferrari thread. At the risk of being slapped by moderators, me opines that the temp closures and riot policing have sucked the life here.
Now when do we get to see Spec 3 engine, ferrari have it, Renault next race, Honda ??
“As usual we develop the future items on the dyno at HRD Sakura in Japan,” the system engineer says. “So we can know the performance and benefits, but we need to check the performance and the reliability is matching what we see on the dyno on track with the driver. So that’s the main point for actual car testing in Hungary.
“In the pre-season tests in Spain, it was the first time on track for Toro Rosso Honda so we tried to get fundamental data and do function checks and initial performance checks. But now we have some experience from the races in the first half of the season, so we can try different points for this test. It means we can try items that are one step ahead.
“As an example of this, regarding the hardware we have some new items for Hungary. Of course for performance, but one item has an impact on energy management and means we should check the energy management strategy with this item. Then for software, from a settings point of view we plan to see how we can gain performance from energy management settings from the past few races. So we can try that.”
“The original first proposal from our side comes from Sakura, and then normally Tanabe-san and Motohashi-san check if there are any risks or if it can really be done in testing. So they think about feasibility, and then with the PU engineers they make a plan.
“Then they discuss the plan with Toro Rosso members. So we will make a list of priorities for each test item by the impact and benefit. From this priority we can make a test item plan.
“Toro Rosso also has a lot of items. Between Toro Rosso and Honda we have a meeting before the testing session and decide on the priorities by discussing them together with the chassis and PU sides.
“Some engineers come from Sakura to Hungary. Not dyno members as they are busy with other work, but we do have some new people who don’t usually come to the track. We use the test as an opportunity for them to gain experience of trackside operations. It’s a good chance for training.”
“I think engineers should be creative and challenging things,” Miyamoto-san says. “We can try anything during the tests, but of course we don’t forget about reliability and time efficiency!
“There’s no legality about the number of PUs we can use but time is limited and testing efficiency is very important. So we will bring special PUs for secret items and keep a high level of efficiency so that we are more economical with time.
“That’s sometimes why you hide the car during testing behind screens in the garages, it can be more secretive than racing!”
“It’s different between the Honda side and the chassis side. At least as Honda we’ve got priorities lined up already for the Hungarian test. Then if we have something urgent that comes up from Germany or Hungary then we are going to potentially put it in as a priority, but at this moment we already have decided what to test. Then depending on the situation we might change it a little bit.
“If we talk about the development procedure phase, the items we are testing are in the latter part. So sometimes items have been ready for a couple of months but the in-season test is kind of like the final checks to prove it can go on the car.”
http://en.hondaracingf1.com/insights/th ... sting.html
They may even put the original one back in inthe end just to fool us with the penalties
The 50 offtopic comments is why I don't do the quality posts any more. Too much noise.Thunder wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 07:17Why does this Thread need 2 new Pages every Day? If there's nothing on Topic to Discuss there is nothing to Discuss. It's that simple. And after over 900 Pages quite understandable. I'd rather have 5 quality Posts per Week in here than 5 quality posts buried by 50 Off Topic Comments that add nothing to the Discussion.McMika98 wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 06:49The thread is a ghosttown now, only thing interesting talked in PU world is in the Ferrari thread. At the risk of being slapped by moderators, me opines that the temp closures and riot policing have sucked the life here.
Now when do we get to see Spec 3 engine, ferrari have it, Renault next race, Honda ??
From what I've interpreted from photos the spark plug is centered in the CC ceiling, and the injector orifice is on the edge of the chamber approximately 40mm away, in between the exhaust ports. How then would the flame be ignited inside of a prechamber at such a distance? Autoignition? If all the fuel is inside the prechamber during a diesel moment then detonation wouldn't be an issue. The controlled explosion through the prechamber orifices would provide the turbulent jets to the CC. And then the spark plug could go to town on the plasma, as you say. Furthering combustion of any unburnt fuel that survived the dieseling and jet expulsion.godlameroso wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018, 00:21What if one of the benefits of having the flame initiated in the pre-chamber is that fire being electrically conductive, can actually boost the intensity and gap the spark can travel. For that matter I'm curious what kind of plug gaps they're using. High boost requires relatively small gaps, even with coil 'packs' so I wonder where the current trends are going.
If you already have "fire" you don't need a spark.godlameroso wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018, 00:21What if one of the benefits of having the flame initiated in the pre-chamber is that fire being electrically conductive, can actually boost the intensity and gap the spark can travel. For that matter I'm curious what kind of plug gaps they're using. High boost requires relatively small gaps, even with coil 'packs' so I wonder where the current trends are going.
If auto ignition occurs in the pre-chamber, the spark plug becomes redundant - at full load at least. I think this conflicts with the rules.roon wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018, 02:39From what I've interpreted from photos the spark plug is centered in the CC ceiling, and the injector orifice is on the edge of the chamber approximately 40mm away, in between the exhaust ports. How then would the flame be ignited inside of a prechamber at such a distance? Autoignition? If all the fuel is inside the prechamber during a diesel moment then detonation wouldn't be an issue. The controlled explosion through the prechamber orifices would provide the turbulent jets to the CC. And then spark plug could go to town on the plasma, as you say. Furthering combustion of any unburnt fuel that survived the dieseling and jet expulsion.
Maybe. The following may be read as "If/when using an ignition system." But the engine is described only as a four stroke, plus all the mechanical specifications. No mention of dieseling nor auto-ignition within the regs, afaik.gruntguru wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018, 02:52If auto ignition occurs in the pre-chamber, the spark plug becomes redundant - at full load at least. I think this conflicts with the rules.
In the TJI concept the pre-chamber only gets 1% or 2% of total fuel. Its function is to ignite the main charge:
- rapidly at multiple locations
- at very lean AFRs where a spark-plug alone is inadequate.
Regarding TJI, why not a rich auto-ignited mixture in the prechamber? Partial combustion in pre-chamber, further combustion within the jets outside the pre-chamber inside the main combustion chamber, further assisted by spark. And/or multiple (since unregulated) fuel injection moments to replenish the prechamber for each jet burst/pre-chamber explosion.5.11 Ignition systems : 5.11.1 Ignition is only permitted by means of a single ignition coil and single spark plug per cylinder. No more than five sparks per cylinder per engine cycle are permitted. The use of plasma, laser or other high frequency ignition techniques is forbidden. Only approved ignition coils may be used and the list of parts approved by the FIA, and the approval procedure, may be found in the Appendix to the Technical Regulations. 5.11.2 Only conventional spark plugs that function by high tension electrical discharge across an exposed gap are permitted. Spark plugs are not subject to the materials restrictions described in Articles 5.16 and 5.17
Probably around 4 or 5 hours.Rodak wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018, 02:09What sort of time is required to change an engine? Is the new unit a complete PU/gearbox/suspension assembly? That would mean only mounting bolts and hose/electrical connections, which could be quite a fast change and would certainly facilitate Honda testing a number of different units.
