Flywheel

[Jolle]

What would you mean by that? What's the advantage?

Use the K unit to help the smooth running of the engine at low revs and have it very responsive at all times. Plus it saves weight.

Even in a 4l street car you can have the responsiveness of a V12 racing engine.

I understand. maybe no use on F1 engine, but it could help with road engines.

Why not in F1 engines? (It might even explain the "bogging down" on the start from a couple of drivers, with the K unit not in operation below 100km/h).
A flywheel is ballast most of the time.

[Brian Coat]

Not certain but I think Jolle's idea is already patented for roads cars, ditto same method to eliminate TV damper.

I like the mechanical MGU-K to MGU-H link idea but I doubt it it's legal?

My initial thinking was a freewheeling inertia rotating about the crank/clutch axis , clutched to the crank/clutch: dubious legality?

TC's ideas are very interesting and could lead to a "less illegal" solution?

The mass penalty vs energy stored point is a good one. No sense having a negative lap time contribution.

The reason all this interests me is because any practical loophole offers a prospect of ICE+125+x

Cleverer people than me have probably eliminated the possibility but it's a fun thought experiment.

[Jolle]

Not certain but I think Jolle's idea is already patented for roads cars, ditto same method to eliminate TV damper.

I like the mechanical MGU-K to MGU-H link idea but I doubt it it's legal?

My initial thinking was a freewheeling inertia rotating about the crank/clutch axis , clutched to the crank/clutch: dubious legality?

TC's ideas are very interesting and could lead to a "less illegal" solution?

The mass penalty vs energy stored point is a good one. No sense having a negative lap time contribution.

The reason all this interests me is because any practical loophole offers a prospect of ICE+125+x

Cleverer people than me have probably eliminated the possibility but it's a fun thought experiment.

Doubt there is a patent that prevents to run the K unit for a few % when at low revs, that's all a virtual flywheel has to do. Doesn't cost to much energy and probably can come direct of the H-unit.
A coupling of the H and K unit trough gears is not only a very complicated one but that makes it a compressor because the K unit is connected to the crank (even without a clutch I think).
In racing the best solution is often the KISS one, a few clutches, gears and parts often is not faster.
A K unit not in use (not giving or receiving torque to the crank) could be clutched, but you can also give it a few % power to have it on 0%. Saves lots of weight and is simple. Same goes for the H unit, etc etc.

[sosic2121]

Use the K unit to help the smooth running of the engine at low revs and have it very responsive at all times. Plus it saves weight.

Even in a 4l street car you can have the responsiveness of a V12 racing engine.

I understand. maybe no use on F1 engine, but it could help with road engines.

Why not in F1 engines? (It might even explain the "bogging down" on the start from a couple of drivers, with the K unit not in operation below 100km/h).
A flywheel is ballast most of the time.

my belief is that F1 engine doesn't need significant flywheel (if any) due to high engine speeds (idle revs, starting revs). also there is anti stall mechanism.

[sosic2121]

I like the mechanical MGU-K to MGU-H link idea but I doubt it it's legal?

why would there be mechanical link, when there is already unrestricted electrical one?

[Brian Coat]

Thanks, all for your comments / ideas.

I have now convinced myself:

1) I did not articulate the idea clearly enough - lots of crossed wires on this thread
2) However fiendish the flywheel mechanism, if useful, it would probably be declared illegal

[Tommy Cookers]

....... However fiendish the flywheel mechanism, if useful, it would probably be declared illegal

a switchable-inertia 'engine flywheel' at the junction with the MGU-K would do the job, mounted via a switchable bidirectional freewheel ?
production vehicles have used switchable-inertia flywheels
here the low inertia is (close to) zero, the high inertia unusually high, and the switching by programme

eg whenever the driver accelerates at less than best-efficiency torque the flywheel accumulates energy generated more efficiently
because the flywheel increases engine torque and so efficiency, while the wheel torque remains unchanged
(and exhaust energy would be increased)
and at some point it reaches full rpm without having eg impeded any upshifts (because the freewheel has allowed overrunning)

programmed switching of the freewheel then bleeds down its rpm using GU-K action feeding 120 kW MU-K action, driving the car electrically
(yes this would require some some rather unusual machine - but there's no rule preventing it)
without drawing any of the lap ration of MJ from the battery and without affecting the ICE, still driving the car mechanically

of course without impeding recovery under braking
any downshifting is also unimpeded as the programme switches the freewheel so the crankshaft can blip to higher rpm without the flywheel

or eg the flywheel rpm could be used to generate and fill the battery for conventional use eg with the present MGU-K

the flywheel would probably be gear-driven, maybe integrated with some of the gearing the MGU-K uses at present
maybe 2 flywheels coupled in opposite rotation or even independent
but still legal by the present rules

[Brian Coat]

Thanks, TC.

If we place to one side the question of whether this design is useful or optimal, my main nagging doubt remains ... is it legal?