- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
F1 will see a complete change in engine regulations in 2014, and we're having a closer look at what that means exactly
In f1 no, the rules won't allow it. Theoretically? probably could but, from what i understand, the increase in air temp comes mostly from being compressed not from thermal radiation.WilliamsF1 wrote:Can a turbocharger be made out of pyrosic glass-ceramic matrix composite?
If possible will the car still require a intercooler as the thermal transmittance from turbine side to compressor side will be negligible.
Most interesting, a compressor housing machined from aluminium sounds very elegant compared to the typical cast execution. Or did you refer to the compressor-turbine itself, a machined such would be something to behold indeed?scarbs wrote:I've seen a 2014 turbo compressor, it was machined from aluminium. It was a surprisingly large diameter. From what I also saw of the installation, there could be an intercooler packaged on top of the inlet plenums.
The large diameter could be a result of the oversizing. With oversizing I mean that the turbine not only drives the compressor as in conventional turbo chargers but also the MGUH. The diameter is also driven by the single turbine concept for both cylinder banks, which is unusual.scarbs wrote:I've seen a 2014 turbo compressor, it was machined from aluminium. It was a surprisingly large diameter. From what I also saw of the installation, there could be an intercooler packaged on top of the inlet plenums.
The 2014 turbo compressor will not be doing very much but feed the engine's inlet, while if Scarbs were actually referring to the xhaust drive-turbine, I would be very surprised indeed if any part on that side was made from Aluminium.WhiteBlue wrote:The large diameter could be a result of the oversizing. With oversizing I mean that the turbine not only drives the compressor as in conventional turbo chargers but also the MGUH. The diameter is also driven by the single turbine concept for both cylinder banks, which is unusual.scarbs wrote:I've seen a 2014 turbo compressor, it was machined from aluminium. It was a surprisingly large diameter. From what I also saw of the installation, there could be an intercooler packaged on top of the inlet plenums.
They could also be a nickel alloy but I don't think they will be seeing that much heat in the compressor. My money would be on Ti to get the mass down.scarbs wrote:I meant the outer compressor casing is CNC Alu. The turbine casing & HERS appeared to be steel\Ti (?)
I wasn't second guessing I was talking about the turbines and the hot side housing.xpensive wrote:I really see no reason to second-guess Scarbs here, when I'm certain that he can tell the difference between Al and Ti, where an Al-alloy makes sense in the compressor casing due to density, 2.7 vs 4.5 for Ti, I doubt if strength is an objective there.
Al is a bitch to pour if you don't go pressure-die or investment casting, why a machined housing for a prototype or small-series would seem to be the sensible way to go, at least at this point of development.
The xhaust drive-turbine casing is another matter though, what did they use back in the 80s hey-days?
If weight is a factor Magnesium would be the best choice for compressor housing. Used in WRC and Le Mans for a long time. Unfortunately it's banned in, what some call, pinnacle of motorsport.xpensive wrote:I really see no reason to second-guess Scarbs here, when I'm certain that he can tell the difference between Al and Ti, where an Al-alloy makes sense in the compressor casing due to density, 2.7 vs 4.5 for Ti, I doubt if strength is an objective there.
Yet James Allen writes about the Mercedes engine having ceramic pistons in this thread: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/12/h ... engine-hq/Edis wrote:Ilmor ran direct injected F1 engines up to about 17,000 rpm years ago without a loss in power and a 5% gain in fuel efficiency, and this was with a fuel pressure of only 150 bar. Back then it was difficult to find suitable injectors for the purpose, since then a lot have happened in that area.Holm86 wrote:Okay didnt think of that. But i know that direct injection can have problems keeping up in high revs. Remember reading a article on the Porsche Spyder LMP2 car a few years back where the biggest challenge was getting the direct injection system to work at 12.000 rpm.
But i believe that will be one of the areas that can be developed in F1. A few years and they should be able to run max revs on direct injection alone.
Ceramics are in general a bad idea unless we talk about small wear or heat resistant parts like turbine wheels, balls for bearings, plungers for high pressure fuel pumps and such.Ian P. wrote:I'm just disapointed that they didn't allow ceramic components. This engine design is all about thermodynamic efficiency and ceramics are likely one way to gain it.
Trying to insulate the combustion chamber is a bad idea, it just increase exhaust temperature, knocking and reduce volumetric efficiency.
Ceramics have very high compressive strengths but their tensile strength is low. In tension a ceramic part fail by fast fracture and there is no way to tell when that is going to happen with a certain part (unlike with metals were fatigue can be predicted). Also, the larger the part, the greater the chance that there is a material defect in the ceramic part that can initiate the failure.
Normally you get a greater cooling effect by injecting the fuel directly into the cylinder. That is one reason why direct injected engine are less prone to knock.xpensive wrote:I am pretty convinced that the cooling effect of the fuel injection will be more efficient the more upstream you can do it?
Mixture preparation can however suffer due to the short time availible for mixing.
Intercooling is useful in keeping the engine cool and improving volumetric efficiency, but it doesn't have to have a positive effect on engine efficiency.ringo wrote:I think it will be worth it.
Intercooling is the key word in turbo efficiency. If they don't have it, then it would be a complete gimmick to have electric pit lane running in the name of saving energy.
The tiles used on the bottom of the space shuttle insulate well because they are 90% air. Think of them like plastic foam but instead of plastic they are made from silica with a black borosilicate coating.xpensive wrote:Ceramics are used for thermal insulation, like the bottom of the space-shuttle, but they don't "absorb" anything.
Since ceramics with poor heat conduction tend to crack when they are heated (or cooled) the heat shield is "precracked" by using several small tiles instead of one large heat shield.
I accept that JA is not a totally reliable source. Are ceramic pistons being used?It’s amazing to look back on the days when each team would bring as many as 10 engines to each race and bolt in a fresh one every day. What has come with the freeze in V8 engine regulations is a deeper understanding of the engines, which has brought amazing reliability The ceramic pistons today, for example, are lighter than those on qualifying engines of 10 years ago when they were just about strong enough to last for an hour’s qualifying session. And yet now they last 3,000kms!