Mclaren MP4-30 Honda

[Blackout]

I don't believe the issues will be limited to the turbo. It's just a hunch, but I think it extends to the MGU-K and MGU-H too. Honda has problems in a lot areas: power deployment, efficiency, harvesting,... .

Did you include 3 token points btw for the combustion? A different turbo size will mean the combustion change.

What if Honda/Renault go the Merc route, episode 3
Edit: why the hell engine water pump is still there?
I included all this (but I excluded Kers changes in 2016) 25 tokens exactly (+4 for Honda and 12 for Renault in 2015)

[turbof1]

Then it's perhaps possible.

I know that's quite short of an answer, but I can't predict how the future will play out. It feels like they'll be stuck into backtailing. They are using the tokens to correct major design flaws while Mercedes and Ferrari will be fully focussed on outright performance. It's quite a disaster in my eyes.

[ME4ME]

Well I certainly don't disagree, but let's look at it this way:

Hamilton's pole time was a 1:23.397, which is 83.397 seconds.
According to Renault's 2015 Monza preview, 70% of the lap is spend being on full throttle which is equal to 58,378 seconds.
The MGU-K is allowed to use 4 MJ per lap from the Energy Store. At 120 kW that is 33,33 seconds. Thus the MGU-K must be powered by another source for approximately 25 seconds. That alternative source is obviously the MGU-H. Mercedes, Ferrari and even Renault seem to be able to do this.

The Honda PU, according to Arai, is more powerful than the Renault PU, but can not sustain it over time: they can't harvest enough from the MGU-H to feed the MGU-K over the remaining 25 seconds at Monza.

Basically, if they manage to improve their MGU-H harvesting capacity over the winter by altering the ICE, Turbo and MGU-H design, and thus have maximum power continuously while on full throttle, they could make a huge step in performance. It could potentially put them ahead of the 2015 Renault unit.

Obviously neither Mercedes nor Ferrari are going to sit still, they'll surely improve over the winter (Renault I rather not guess..). But since they are all already able to use the MGU-K as much as they want, they need to focus on combustion and fuel improvements to gain further performance. While Mercedes and Ferrari are rumored to have found 40 bhp together with their fuel suppliers, such improvements aren't realistically to be expected next year. Honda will probably have a hard time to catch up to equal performance levels as the front runners, but it's not at all impossible for them to make a big leap for 2016 and improve step by step to be within a couple %-deficit to Mercedes at the end of 2017 like Ferrari is now.

[Blackout]

Mercedes, Ferrari and even Renault seem to be able to do this

Why "even Renault"? According to AMuS and other people, the Renault ERS is the best since late 2014 regarding harvesting and energy deploying

[turbof1]

Hamilton's pole time was a 1:23.397, which is 83.397 seconds.
According to Renault's 2015 Monza preview, 70% of the lap is spend being on full throttle which is equal to 58,378 seconds.
The MGU-K is allowed to use 4 MJ per lap from the Energy Store. At 120 kW that is 33,33 seconds. Thus the MGU-K must be powered by another source for approximately 25 seconds. That alternative source is obviously the MGU-H. Mercedes, Ferrari and even Renault seem to be able to do this.

The rules are that the MGU-K can only transfer 120KW to the drivetrain. This is a very catchy rule since many people read this part wrong, but the 120kw over 33,33s is the maximum of electrical stored power on the drivetrain one can use. While you are correct to state the mgu-h is there to fill the gap to 120KW, if that limit is reached nothing can be gained from it anymore.

Obviously neither Mercedes nor Ferrari are going to sit still, they'll surely improve over the winter (Renault I rather not guess..). But since they are all already able to use the MGU-K as much as they want, they need to focus on combustion and fuel improvements to gain further performance. While Mercedes and Ferrari are rumored to have found 40 bhp together with their fuel suppliers, such improvements aren't realistically to be expected next year. Honda will probably have a hard time to catch up to equal performance levels as the front runners, but it's not at all impossible for them to make a big leap for 2016 and improve step by step to be within a couple %-deficit to Mercedes at the end of 2017 like Ferrari is now.

And to be stuck into the diminishing returns. A couple %-deficit is still just that, a deficit.

[ME4ME]

Mercedes, Ferrari and even Renault seem to be able to do this

Why "even Renault"? According to AMuS and other people, the Renault ERS is the best since late 2014 regarding harvesting and energy deploying

ERS is irrelevant if too much ICE performance is lost in the progress. It's probably the main reason these PU's are so complicated. Maybe the Renault PU is the F1 equivalent of the Top Gear Hammerhead Eagle-I-Thrust in that regard, with it's diesel powered electric motor

https://vimeo.com/18220559

Edit: TurboF1, According to Appendix 3 of the 2015 F1 technical regulations there is no limit in energy flow between the MGU-H and MGU-K. Btw the way I read your post, and I might be wrong, I get the impression you might confuse the 120 kW to be the energy budget, which it isn't. It's those 4 MJ that is the budget, and the 120 kW is the rate in which you can spend it.

[turbof1]

Edit: TurboF1, According to Appendix 3 of the 2015 F1 technical regulations there is no limit in energy flow between the MGU-H and MGU-K.

No, but there is a limit from what the mgu-k can transfer to the drivetrain, measured as 120KW. Once you have 120kw electrical power all lap round, you are not gaining anymore (putting aside turbo spooling for a moment). You could say the energy flow between the mgu-k and mgu-h is limited to difference between what the mgu-k produces AND uses of electrical energy, and 120KW.

Btw the way I read your post, and I might be wrong, I get the impression you might confuse the 120 kW to be the energy budget, which it isn't. It's those 4 MJ that is the budget, and the 120 kW is the rate in which you can spend it.

I rereaded my statement and I had to adjust a few things due I explained it wrong. What you and I say and think basically corresponds, and indeed there is no limited energy budget from the mgu-k to the drivetrain. However there is still a limited power budget, and you cannot exceed that.

[j.yank]

Well I certainly don't disagree, but let's look at it this way:

Hamilton's pole time was a 1:23.397, which is 83.397 seconds.
According to Renault's 2015 Monza preview, 70% of the lap is spend being on full throttle which is equal to 58,378 seconds.
The MGU-K is allowed to use 4 MJ per lap from the Energy Store. At 120 kW that is 33,33 seconds. Thus the MGU-K must be powered by another source for approximately 25 seconds. That alternative source is obviously the MGU-H. Mercedes, Ferrari and even Renault seem to be able to do this.
.

You are making wrong assumption that all of this 70% time per lap on full throttle has available 120 kw even for the top teams. Various sources suggest that the total harvested power (both MGU-K and MGU-H) on Monza is around 4.2 MJ per lap. All teams struggle for energy there but obviously some more than the rest. If you make several scenarios where the deficit in McLaren case is coming from, and compare them to what we saw in the reality, you will see that MGU-H problem is not very convincing. The behavior of the McLaren cars in several situations speaks that probably they have a problem with harvesting of MGU-K rather than with MGU-H.

[turbof1]

Well I certainly don't disagree, but let's look at it this way:

Hamilton's pole time was a 1:23.397, which is 83.397 seconds.
According to Renault's 2015 Monza preview, 70% of the lap is spend being on full throttle which is equal to 58,378 seconds.
The MGU-K is allowed to use 4 MJ per lap from the Energy Store. At 120 kW that is 33,33 seconds. Thus the MGU-K must be powered by another source for approximately 25 seconds. That alternative source is obviously the MGU-H. Mercedes, Ferrari and even Renault seem to be able to do this.
.

You are making wrong assumption that all of this 70% time per lap on full throttle has available 120 kw even for the top teams. Various sources suggest that the total harvested power (both MGU-K and MGU-H) on Monza is around 4.2 MJ per lap. All teams struggle for energy there but obviously some more than the rest. If you make several scenarios where the deficit in McLaren case is coming from, and compare them to what we saw in the reality, you will see that MGU-H problem is not very convincing. The behavior of the McLaren cars in several situations speaks that probably they have a problem with harvesting of MGU-K rather than with MGU-H.

Yes, but that's assuming a race situation. During qualifying you need to add 4MJ from the battery to that. So around 8MJ is available across the lap, or 66,66s 120KW full throttle. It'll leave around 1MJ for spooling the turbo.

[ME4ME]

You are making wrong assumption that all of this 70% time per lap on full throttle has available 120 kw even for the top teams. Various sources suggest that the total harvested power (both MGU-K and MGU-H) on Monza is around 4.2 MJ per lap. All teams struggle for energy there but obviously some more than the rest. If you make several scenarios where the deficit in McLaren case is coming from, and compare them to what we saw in the reality, you will see that MGU-H problem is not very convincing. The behavior of the McLaren cars in several situations speaks that probably they have a problem with harvesting of MGU-K rather than with MGU-H.

Where does that number come from? I very much doubt any PU manufacturer would state such thing publicly. My assumption that Mercedes and Ferrari are able to use the MGU-K in motor-mode basically always when on full throttle are merely based on observations; Blachimont as an example where the Mercedes car would still accelerate while the Mclaren wouldn't. I also wonder why, as you stated, Honda would have issues with MGU-K harvesting. It's limited to 2 MJ, so the other PU's are limited as well in this respect. It's not new technology either; even though the current MGU-K is more powerful, it's not that different from KERS which the teams have much experience of using. I guess because of the lack of some crucial information, inevitably wrong assumptions will be made. I'll happily admit to that.

[Wazari]

ok...Ippon to you.

What you make of http://www.f1-fansite.com/f1-news/boull ... o-improve/ ?

With all the doom and gloom around these digital pages of the Honda PU problems. Think there is truth to that?

Lol. I don't know if it's an ippon to me, but I was just stating what I had understood from reliable sources (IMO), as to how things went down.

I don't what to think of the article. So many things written in articles get lost in translation or taken completely out of context. I find it extremely hard to believe that Arai-san would literally say that the current Honda PU in Belgium would be a match for Ferrari. Maybe the ICE part by itself might come close and be slightly superior to Renault but obviously the problem rests somewhere in the MGU-H, MGU-K portion of the PU and from everything I've read and heard, you don't fix that with a flick of a switch. I still believe Honda is using some sort of axial turbine configuration that is not working out.

I think that next season they will come out with a completely new MGU-H design. Testing is so limited I don't know how much progress they can make in the off season. I know Honda will strive to make vast improvements and I think success is not that far away.

[j.yank]

Where does that number come from? I very much doubt any PU manufacturer would state such thing publicly. My assumption that Mercedes and Ferrari are able to use the MGU-K in motor-mode basically always when on full throttle are merely based on observations; Blachimont as an example where the Mercedes car would still accelerate while the Mclaren wouldn't. I also wonder why, as you stated, Honda would have issues with MGU-K harvesting. It's limited to 2 MJ, so the other PU's are limited as well in this respect. It's not new technology either; even though the current MGU-K is more powerful, it's not that different from KERS which the teams have much experience of using. I guess because of the lack of some crucial information, inevitably wrong assumptions will be made. I'll happily admit to that.

Here is one article that details telemetry data from Spa, but for Monza the situation is even worst:
http://www.omnicorse.it/magazine/63023/ ... ella-mgu-h

If you take the size of the MGU-H and its maximum RPM (120 000), you can expect its output power to be about 40-80 kw. This also fits in what we know for the full throttle time per lap for these circuits. Now, after Monza Button said that they cannot use ERS on the corner exists 4 and 7. If you take corner 7 the braking time there is 1.07 sec according to Brembo. In other words, when you hit the brake you have 1.07 sec for harvesting through 120 kw MGU-K. At the same time MGU-H should take energy from MGU-K or ES to spin the compressor in order to have boost on the corner exit. The reaction time of the turbine itself is 0.2 sec. If you add 0.2 to 1.07 you get 1.27 sec consumption at 60 kw through MGU-H. If you have at the same moment properly running MGU-K to deliver energy in the systems at rate of 120 kw you will not have any problem to accelerate the car out of the exit. The only explanation why Button does have exit power in some corners but in other corners he doesn't have available energy, is severe underperformance of MGU-K that fails to deliver 120 kw in charging mode. As I said before, this creates energy deficit in the system that is like a spiral of financial debt - if you don't have resources to cover the deficit you are running down and down. Generally speaking, from what I saw I can tell that Arai is right that their ICE has a slightly better power than RedBul and is close to Ferrari, but the biggest problem is the energy management throughout the whole lap when you have energy deficit because of the circuit layout. All teams have such deficit but they have resources partially to cover it, while McLaren have problem with MGU-K that creates further deficit. MGU-H can not create such deficit that we see on some corners but not in the rest.

[bergie88]

You are making wrong assumption that all of this 70% time per lap on full throttle has available 120 kw even for the top teams. Various sources suggest that the total harvested power (both MGU-K and MGU-H) on Monza is around 4.2 MJ per lap. All teams struggle for energy there but obviously some more than the rest. If you make several scenarios where the deficit in McLaren case is coming from, and compare them to what we saw in the reality, you will see that MGU-H problem is not very convincing. The behavior of the McLaren cars in several situations speaks that probably they have a problem with harvesting of MGU-K rather than with MGU-H.

Where does that number come from? I very much doubt any PU manufacturer would state such thing publicly. My assumption that Mercedes and Ferrari are able to use the MGU-K in motor-mode basically always when on full throttle are merely based on observations; Blachimont as an example where the Mercedes car would still accelerate while the Mclaren wouldn't. I also wonder why, as you stated, Honda would have issues with MGU-K harvesting. It's limited to 2 MJ, so the other PU's are limited as well in this respect. It's not new technology either; even though the current MGU-K is more powerful, it's not that different from KERS which the teams have much experience of using. I guess because of the lack of some crucial information, inevitably wrong assumptions will be made. I'll happily admit to that.

Lets try to verify the 4.2 MJ per lap. Data from Brembo shows that around 0.7 MJ per lap can be harvested by the MGU-K during full braking, which seems very low but looking at pure braking time at 120 kW does not deliver that much energy. Lets assume that the MGU-K also generates a bit when the ICE delivers more power than the car can handle: 0.3 MJ, plus 0.7 from braking makes 1 MJ.

This means that 3.2 MJ per lap is generated by the MGU-H. Lets assume that the MGU-H is harvesting when the driver is on full throttle, it might be the case all the time but it is quite close imo. When we take a lap time of 1.25 at Monza and 70% of the track is full throttle, this results in 3.2MJ/(85*0.7)=54kW of MGU-H harvesting power, which is not a unreal value I think.

Edit: I just checked the link to Omnicorse in the post above me, in which the figure shows that around 2/9 of the total harvested energy comes from the MGU-K and 7/9(!) from the MGU-H. When we divide the 0.7 MJ from the Brembo data by 2/9, it results in 0.7/(2/9)=3.2 MJ, which I just assumed as the energy generated by the MGU-H.

[Blackout]

I don't want to start a war among posters. I was just trying to maybe shed some insight as to the path of the current Honda PU without getting anyone inside of Honda in any hot water, which BTW is pretty easy to do. So let's say we are purely speaking in hypotheticals;

Sometime in late 2012, a British manufacturing firm contacts a Japanese automaker about the possibility of re-entering the F1 arena as an exclusive engine supplier for their F1 team. The Japanese say how much and how soon? The teams says probably at the start of 2016, but let's discuss details soon. Many meetings but nothing ironed out. Engine manufacturer dedicates small amount of staff to start broad concept layout of this PU. They soon hear from above, move forward, it looks like it's going to happen. By now it's Q3 - Q4 of 2013 and the plan is to start racing in 2016. They are going to build this PU with a radial turbine at the rear of the motor with a higher and longer footprint than the ultimate design. Japanese executive(s) so eager to please and get back to "glory days" of F1 says no problem to British team when they announce they are going to terminate contract with current engine supplier at the end of 2014. Oh crap.....More crap; now year end of 2013, British team says we are revamping aero package and chassis with a strict size requirement. The current design won't fit..........Nani kore??(What the.....) Sorry folks, the saga continues, I have to run.

Of course this is all fictional.........

This means Honda started the Hybrid V6 turbo project in 2012 (and started racing in 2015)? so where is the problem? Renault and maybe Ferrari started their project in 2011 and begun racing it in 2014. There is no (big) difference between them... The others had a V8 project running in the same time though...

[godlameroso]

ok...Ippon to you.

What you make of http://www.f1-fansite.com/f1-news/boull ... o-improve/ ?

With all the doom and gloom around these digital pages of the Honda PU problems. Think there is truth to that?

Lol. I don't know if it's an ippon to me, but I was just stating what I had understood from reliable sources (IMO), as to how things went down.

I don't what to think of the article. So many things written in articles get lost in translation or taken completely out of context. I find it extremely hard to believe that Arai-san would literally say that the current Honda PU in Belgium would be a match for Ferrari. Maybe the ICE part by itself might come close and be slightly superior to Renault but obviously the problem rests somewhere in the MGU-H, MGU-K portion of the PU and from everything I've read and heard, you don't fix that with a flick of a switch. I still believe Honda is using some sort of axial turbine configuration that is not working out.

I think that next season they will come out with a completely new MGU-H design. Testing is so limited I don't know how much progress they can make in the off season. I know Honda will strive to make vast improvements and I think success is not that far away.

Maybe their concept isn't to use an actual axial turbine, but rather make the ICE work as the stages in an axial turbine engine. That the power unit as a whole is more Turbine engine than ICE.