2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[dren]

This link or that one?

The 2nd link is the right one, about the Wright turbo compounded engine with blowdown turbines. As TC stated, they gained "free" power without a hit to efficiency with the blowdown turbines geared to the main shaft.

[ringo]

Probably Renault still use custom made Magnetti Marelli gasoline pump systems. Even injectors (according Marmorini)...

compact single piston, cam driven fuel pump equipped with an electronic regulating valve which allows flow rate and pressure control.

http://www.magnetimarelli.com/sites/def ... k=pbeFxKG_

http://www.magnetimarelli.com/sites/def ... k=Rb35NmU6

Possible smematics of F1 common rail periferia...

http://i.imgur.com/pYXaVY2.png

More here: http://www.magnetimarelli.com/business_ ... mps#tab--4

Can those pumps deliver 500 bar? I was expecting something more robust looking.

[Blanchimont]

The last link mentions 20MPa, 200bar.

[aleks_ader]

Probably Renault still use custom made Magnetti Marelli gasoline pump systems. Even injectors (according Marmorini)...

compact single piston, cam driven fuel pump equipped with an electronic regulating valve which allows flow rate and pressure control.

http://www.magnetimarelli.com/sites/def ... k=pbeFxKG_

http://www.magnetimarelli.com/sites/def ... k=Rb35NmU6

Possible smematics of F1 common rail periferia...

http://i.imgur.com/pYXaVY2.png

More here: http://www.magnetimarelli.com/business_ ... mps#tab--4

Can those pumps deliver 500 bar? I was expecting something more robust looking.

No look papers. And as blandschimond sad, this is just hint or preatty "close" concept what might renault will run. Roughly principles stay the same. Even from v8 differences are in small details like most obviouse is thermal strees (DI), pressure, endurance>added mass and need a lot fine tuning etc.


With that post i just want to make picture that Marmorinis and Magnettis word are true. At base of avalible data i can 50% say> Renault could use Magnetti Marelli state of the art inject systems.

[ringo]

I've seen radial pumps used for high pressure diesel fuel systems. Could find its place in F1 maybe.
In fact i wont be surprised if we see multiple fuel pumps to meet the pressure and speed demands of these race engines.


This would be a suitable pump.



http://www.boschrexroth-us.com/country_ ... 005-10.pdf

not too big either, 7 inch diameter with about 3 inches deep. It can deliver 500 bar at 100kg/hr

[Holm86]

I know the mgu-h can keep the turbo spooled in off-throttle conditions, but that takes energy. I was thinking of the cold blowing from before, could this aid in keeping the turbo spooled? I know for next year you can only have the butterflies open up to 30% at zero throttle input, would that be enough to make a difference? Would the cooler air entering th turbine be a positive or negative? Would the increased engine braking effect of pumping the air through make this completely undesirable?

Thanks in advance.

I've been talking about this for a while now. Are you sure only 30% are allowed?? Could you please show me where that is written.

You can see what I wrote here :

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 4+exhausts

and here

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... ld#p444454

[thisisatest]

Ha. My memory is so bad. I actually added to that same discussion about exhaust exits! So, according to a "reliable source", up to 30% butterfly opening was allowed at zero throttle, as long as torque was zero (or less). This was the 2013 regulation, I had not found the 2014 regulation.
Would having the butterflies open increase or decrease pumping losses? I can see it work out either way in my head, so I'd really appreciate it if one of you super knowledgeable folks would just set me straight... Explaining how it is so would be a great bonus too.
Thanks

[Holm86]

Ha. My memory is so bad. I actually added to that same discussion about exhaust exits! So, according to a "reliable source", up to 30% butterfly opening was allowed at zero throttle, as long as torque was zero (or less). This was the 2013 regulation, I had not found the 2014 regulation.
Would having the butterflies open increase or decrease pumping losses? I can see it work out either way in my head, so I'd really appreciate it if one of you super knowledgeable folks would just set me straight... Explaining how it is so would be a great bonus too.
Thanks

It would decrease the pumping loses. Though there would be more air for the engine to compress during the compression stroke. But the energy used to compress that air is given back. It works just like a spring.

I can only see beneficial things with running the throttles open wide at zero % pedal position.

[FW17]

I've seen radial pumps used for high pressure diesel fuel systems. Could find its place in F1 maybe.
In fact i wont be surprised if we see multiple fuel pumps to meet the pressure and speed demands of these race engines.


This would be a suitable pump.

http://www.boschrexroth-us.com/country_ ... /11263.jpg

http://www.boschrexroth-us.com/country_ ... 005-10.pdf

not too big either, 7 inch diameter with about 3 inches deep. It can deliver 500 bar at 100kg/hr

I dont think it needs to be that big, check out this product from bosch for 500 bar

http://www.bosch-motorsport.de/de/de/pr ... 33926.html

[ringo]

Ok, the flow details are in cm cube per cam rotation. It would be nice if they gave us a flow graph.
One thing about this pump is that it requires a supply pump, or lift pump. So we can expect an intank pump to deliver 50 to 100 psi to this piston pump.

This will deliver 5.6 L/min at 10,500 rpm. Which is sufficient. The engine will use 100kg/hr which is roughly 1.8 L/min
This piston pump will have varying flow rates depending on the camshaft speed.
It will deliver, but in some ways i like the controllability of the rotary design, especially for all the tricks these teams will want to play with the engine.
But if the little piston design is good enough, and it's lighter then they'll use it.

[Tommy Cookers]

..... in non WOT situations, one would still want the turbine doing as much work as possible to keep efficiency high?
..... Valve Timing surely is important. The miller cycle ......
Using fuel with a high latent heat of evaporation is not illegal .....Multiple injections are also legal .....

Since engines are expected to run lean, at non WOT, it may me more efficient to run a very lean mixture as long as it can combustion, with the butterflies as open as possible in order to limit power, and keep mass flow as high as possible. Is that a reasonable assumption?

variable geometry is not allowed eg the turbine, the valve motion
IIRC 25% of fuel can be injected indirectly

Renault seem clear that modulated displacement is here to stay ? ie even with exhaust rules against blowing
(NA F1 used 4 cyl running as essential to the best response/controllability in driver partial torque demand condition)
MD also has the benefits of lean running with fewer disbenefits
of course MD and lean running can be combined

regarding power 'recovery' at partial or zero torque
some tracks are not fuel-hungry ie the 100 kg/hr rate will tend to less than 100 kg consumption
fake recovery will be made (engine running to generate power from the MGU-K, via overrun push/electronic rear brake rules)
yes, this could/would be combined with other ways of engine operating as above to generate from the MGU-H
at only maybe 2 tracks will the 100 kg/hr tend to use all 100 kg without the above fakery

[Crucial_Xtreme]

I'm not too into posting rumors and such but the source is credible. Omnicorse.it reports the 2014 Renault Power Units may not be ready for the Jerez test on 28 Janurary. Christian Horner in the last meeting of F1 teams asked for a one week delay for the Jerez test, but other teams did not accept. According to OmniCorse.it the problem is with the BorgWarner turbo which is supplied by Pankl APC Turbosystems GMBH formerly known as KKK (Kühnle, Kopp & Kausch AG).

They say Renault has moved past initial problems with overheating with a brilliant modification to the crankshaft. OmniCorse also reports Mercedes & Ferrari would like/have asked for a two week gap between Jerez & Bahrain so they may analyze all the data from Jerez and make the necessary changes. Mercedes nor Ferrari have achieved a certain level of reliability but have assured team customers their engines will be ready for Jerez.

This is not a Red Bull issue, it's a Renault Power Unit issue.

[langwadt]

..... in non WOT situations, one would still want the turbine doing as much work as possible to keep efficiency high?
..... Valve Timing surely is important. The miller cycle ......
Using fuel with a high latent heat of evaporation is not illegal .....Multiple injections are also legal .....

Since engines are expected to run lean, at non WOT, it may me more efficient to run a very lean mixture as long as it can combustion, with the butterflies as open as possible in order to limit power, and keep mass flow as high as possible. Is that a reasonable assumption?

variable geometry is not allowed eg the turbine, the valve motion
IIRC 25% of fuel can be injected indirectly

that was in an early draft, current one says:

5.10.2 There may only be one direct injector per cylinder and no injectors are permitted upstream of
the intake valves or downstream of the exhaust valves.

[tuj]

They say Renault has moved past initial problems with overheating with a brilliant modification to the crankshaft.

Excuse my ignorance, but how does this work? Did they modify the firing order to try to reduce EGT?

[kooleracer]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN5blCukeWw[/youtube]

Really think F1 should have gone more radical and stick with the 4 cylinder proposal the FIA did, but as usual Ferrari crying about every rule change. Sound clip of a Cosworth 1.6L I4 engine [turbo and supercharged 500bhp max 10k rpm] f1 prototype that is used in the C-X75. Hopefully the F1 engines will sound something like that. Really think F1 has missed a big opportunity the be really revolutionary, Porsche's LMP1 already gone that way. The higher turbo pressures would be more challenging for the engine manufacturers.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0CjIVKM1z0[/youtube]
Looks like the C-X75 is more advanced than the F1 2014 powerunit.