2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[xpensive]

As I understand it, one other advantage of pneumatic valve springs over coils is that they don't have to worry about harmonic resonance issues at certain RPMs. Either way, going back to coils just feels like it would be a step backwards.

But the biggest advantage is the lack of hysteresis, pressure is virtually constant, which means higher rpm and less cooling.

[Tommy Cookers]

the late Prof Blair's work showed that mechanical springs were ok in at an 18000 over-rev of the Ducati Moto GP
with finger followers (but not with direct tappet actuation)
2014 cylinders are roughly that size

ducati does not use springs. it uses desmodromic distribution.

Prof Blair did work for Ducati on race (Moto GP?) induction systems, his prime field of expertise
the valve work was his own
yes I know how Ducati has been operating its valves (since 1958 or so)

he says that pneumatic valve springs work by having some designed-in bleeding of gas, ie they are lightly damped thereby
without this damping they do not work so well
this is could be seen as hysteresis

[FW17]

What type of cooling will be done for the turbo charger and ERS-H? Water or Oil? Will this be a seperate loop or be combined with the existing cooling systems?

Can the Turbo charger be water jacketed?

[xpensive]

With this low boost, 1.5 bar at the most, turbo cooling will hardly be a issue.

[Holm86]

With this low boost, 1.5 bar at the most, turbo cooling will hardly be a issue.

The turbo will still get pretty hot. It still has 1000° hot exhaust gasses flowing through it.

[tuj]

perhaps some sort of phenolic material between the hot side and cold side of the turbo?

[xpensive]

With this low boost, 1.5 bar at the most, turbo cooling will hardly be a issue.

The turbo will still get pretty hot. It still has 1000° hot exhaust gasses flowing through it.

Still nothing compared to xhaust temps from 4-5 bar boosts 30 years ago.

[FW17]

With this low boost, 1.5 bar at the most, turbo cooling will hardly be a issue.

The turbo will still get pretty hot. It still has 1000° hot exhaust gasses flowing through it.

Still nothing compared to xhaust temps from 4-5 bar boosts 30 years ago.

Even with low boost the turbine side is going to be red hot under normal conditions (i dont see the connection between boost and housing temperature).

It must be also taken into account while the compressor is only running to 1.5 bar (assumption at f1tech) the load on the shaft is still going to be high or higher than the old days as the ERS is coupled to this.

So what does water jacketing do? reduce the efficiency of the turbine?

[dren]

I'd be more concerned about oil temps in the bearings, unless they use magnetic bearings. I guess it comes down to material properties for the turbine and shell. Our old GE steam turbines at work see 1050F but only rotate at 3600rpm. They are not cooled. We only monitor bearing oil temps.

I would think you'd not want to cool the turbine due to an efficiency hit. Only cool if materials require it.

[xpensive]

The connection between boost and xhaust temp should be obvious as the latter increases with the amount of fuel burned.

Next year's 1-1,5 bar boost is just a tad more than what you will find in a typical street car

[Holm86]

The connection between boost and xhaust temp should be obvious as the latter increases with the amount of fuel burned.

Next year's 1-1,5 bar boost is just a tad more than what you will find in a typical street car

They also produce 3-4 times as much kilowatts. And street cars doesn't run at WOT as much as an F1 car does.

[Bomber_Pilot]

I don't know if this has been posted before. It's an older documentary, but still very interesting. You can even see a certain gentleman, a young Ross Brawn at 26min in the second part.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbB1qwhKaaE[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqfVAGOaGEc[/youtube]

Since I'm not quite sure this is the appropriate thread, mods feel free to move it.

[xpensive]

The connection between boost and xhaust temp should be obvious as the latter increases with the amount of fuel burned.

Next year's 1-1,5 bar boost is just a tad more than what you will find in a typical street car

They also produce 3-4 times as much kilowatts. And street cars doesn't run at WOT as much as an F1 car does.

It's about how much energy is passing through the xhaust, and a 6 Bar (abs) charge will xit three times more than 2 bar.

[Holm86]

The connection between boost and xhaust temp should be obvious as the latter increases with the amount of fuel burned.

Next year's 1-1,5 bar boost is just a tad more than what you will find in a typical street car

They also produce 3-4 times as much kilowatts. And street cars doesn't run at WOT as much as an F1 car does.

It's about how much energy is passing through the xhaust, and a 6 Bar (abs) charge will xit three times more than 2 bar.

Its true about the energy. But you cant compare boost like that. The exhaust temperature and boost doesnt necessarily have anything to do with each other.

Road cars run relatively small displacement and relativly low revs. Then you add boost to compensate for this. So if a 1.6L road car is producing 300 hp at 5000 rpm with 1.5 bars of boost, it does not mean that its exhaust temperature is the same as a formula 1 engine at 10.000 rpm and 1.5 bars of boost producing 600 hp just because the boost is the same.

Its all about the waste energy. And if the thermal efficency of the two engines is roughly the same then more hp means more waste energy. Some of that is going through the exhaust.

[xpensive]

If you care to remember Holm, I was comparing next year's 2 bar V6 with the 6 bar V6 from 30 years ago, a world of difference.