2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Tommy Cookers]

the 29000 and 60000 figures are bang up-to-date
(we have only just found that particulates in the sub 2.5 micron band penetrate blood vessels)

more massflow doesn't equal more recoverable exhaust energy, as more energy is demanded from the compressor
there has not been a production compounded diesel (apart from that USSR job with 42 or 56 cylinders) until modern times
the Nomad was exactly 0% more efficient than the Wright with its 7.2 CR (Nomad fuel was of course 61% of 100? Avgas cost ex-UK)
yes, the recent partial convergence of CI and SI CRs, boosts, etc is inconsistent with the F1 diesel ban

btw
the 1980s turbo F1 rules had a less anti-diesel position than is current (1500cc 2 stroke V12 4 turbo diesel, anybody ?)
iirc no minimum octane number for the fuel, and higher volume-specific energy 'cruise-missile' style blend is possible with CI
ok the boost limit didn't help the diesel

[trinidefender]

the 29000 and 60000 figures are bang up-to-date
(we have only just found that particulates in the sub 2.5 micron band penetrate blood vessels)

more massflow doesn't equal more recoverable exhaust energy, as more energy is demanded from the compressor
there has not been a production compounded diesel (apart from that USSR job with 42 or 56 cylinders) until recently
yes, the recent partial convergence of CI and SI CRs, boosts, etc is inconsistent with the F1 diesel ban

btw
the 1980s turbo F1 rules had a less anti-diesel position than is current (eg 1500cc V12 4 turbo diesel ?)
iirc no minimum octane number for the fuel, and higher volume-specific energy 'cruise-missile' style blend is possible with CI

Can you possibly provide a source for the data about the particulates?

I understand that more energy is demanded from the compressor but at the same time a Diesel engine is always running on the lean side. If you increase the exhaust mass flow then you increase the energy going to the compressor at part load. This helps to keep the turbocharger spinning and reduces the work that the MGU-H will have to do to keep it spinning.

One of the quickest ways to considerably slow a turbocharger down on any car is to snap the throttle closed.

[Tommy Cookers]

the 29000 and 60000 figures are bang up-to-date
(we have only just found that particulates in the sub 2.5 micron band penetrate blood vessels)

Can you possibly provide a source for the data about the particulates?

earnest and sincere (UK) TV documentaries by our 2 earnest and sincere publicly-funded BBC and Channel 4 (and our ITV)
the proposed/intended diesel ban by the mayor of Paris

[trinidefender]

the 29000 and 60000 figures are bang up-to-date
(we have only just found that particulates in the sub 2.5 micron band penetrate blood vessels)

Can you possibly provide a source for the data about the particulates?

earnest and sincere (UK) TV documentaries by our 2 earnest and sincere publicly-funded BBC and Channel 4 (and our ITV)
the proposed/intended diesel ban by the mayor of Paris

Hmmm instead of a ban I've always been in favour of GTL fuels. Synthetic diesel could significantly reduce the particulate problem. Should a diesel like fuel be used in F1 then it will almost guaranteed to be 100% synthetic.

[Tommy Cookers]

but it could 'easily' be 100% biofuel

[ringo]

For diesels you simply control the fuel. You don't throttle. Your turbine/compressor energy would more vary with the temperature after combustion than mass flow of air.

[trinidefender]

For diesels you simply control the fuel. You don't throttle. Your turbine/compressor energy would more vary with the temperature after combustion than mass flow of air.

That's exactly my point that you don't throttle the airflow. Of course temperature would have a larger effect but the point still stands that having a larger mass flow of air will still help to keep the turbocharger spinning than if the intake airflow was throttled.

[FW17]

Basic question


Can a MGU work as a generator and a motor at the same moment? or can it be made to do only one function at a time? The FIA regulations chart shows that there can be unlimited flow from MGUH to K but also from MGUK to H.
How is unlimited flow from MGUK to H useful?



Reason for the question-
1) MGUK can charge the ES to only 2MJ per lap
2) if MGUK power is used to drive the MGUH when the specified 2MJ to ES has been reached can additional energy be harvest by it being routed through MGUH

[Tommy Cookers]

Can a MGU work as a generator and a motor at the same moment? or can it be made to do only one function at a time?
How is unlimited flow from MGUK to H useful?
Reason for the question-
1) MGUK can charge the ES to only 2MJ per lap
2) if MGUK power is used to drive the MGUH when the specified 2MJ to ES has been reached can additional energy be harvest by it being routed through MGUH

imo the rules in principle allow eg a something called MGU-K that could generate and motor simultaneouusly
but it would be pointless to do this here (conventionally an MG generates and motors but never simultaneously)
and the MGU-K will anyway have little or no surplus beyond the 2 MJ (this needing 16.7 sec of hard braking)

we know normal motor action by the MGU-H is to spool-up the turbo and contribute to constant managment of the compressor rpm

but also, wastegating the exhaust and motoring the turbo eliminates backpressure and so maximises crankshaft power
and so (temporarily) gives the highest PU power (if the mu-k action is at max power from stored energy) eg for qually ?
NIH

the unlimited flow in question is just a side-effect of the need to define as unlimited the flow from the MGU-H ?

[olefud]

For diesels you simply control the fuel. You don't throttle. Your turbine/compressor energy would more vary with the temperature after combustion than mass flow of air.

That's exactly my point that you don't throttle the airflow. Of course temperature would have a larger effect but the point still stands that having a larger mass flow of air will still help to keep the turbocharger spinning than if the intake airflow was throttled.

As a rule the excess air will quench the combustion temperature and compromise available energy. There have been CI engines that throttled the air at lower power (throttle settings) to aid efficiency. Just pumping air in and out sans combustion is not gainful.

[bergie88]

Can a MGU work as a generator and a motor at the same moment? or can it be made to do only one function at a time?
How is unlimited flow from MGUK to H useful?
Reason for the question-
1) MGUK can charge the ES to only 2MJ per lap
2) if MGUK power is used to drive the MGUH when the specified 2MJ to ES has been reached can additional energy be harvest by it being routed through MGUH

imo the rules in principle allow eg a something called MGU-K that could generate and motor simultaneouusly
but it would be pointless to do this here (conventionally an MG generates and motors but never simultaneously)
and the MGU-K will anyway have little or no surplus beyond the 2 MJ (this needing 16.7 sec of hard braking)

we know normal motor action by the MGU-H is to spool-up the turbo and contribute to constant managment of the compressor rpm

but also, wastegating the exhaust and motoring the turbo eliminates backpressure and so maximises crankshaft power
and so (temporarily) gives the highest PU power (if the mu-k action is at max power from stored energy) eg for qually ?
NIH

the unlimited flow in question is just a side-effect of the need to define as unlimited the flow from the MGU-H ?

Motoring and generating at the same time is not possible, because in the end it is always doing one of the two. For instance, when 30 kW of generating is needed (lets assume generating is negative power, so -30 kW) and +50 kW of motoring, then it is motoring at +50-30= 20 kW. The power electronics are taking care of the positive and negative power flows, not the electric motor.

The only situation I can think of where this could be benificial is when the turbo is getting spooled up while the car is decelerating (braking). Then the regenerated power from the MGU-K could be used without going go the ES (battery) to power the MGU-H. However, as already mentioned the 2MJ limit from the MGU-K to the ES is by far not reached at all circuits, in which the benefit from doing this is gone.

[gruntguru]

For diesels you simply control the fuel. You don't throttle. Your turbine/compressor energy would more vary with the temperature after combustion than mass flow of air.

That's exactly my point that you don't throttle the airflow. Of course temperature would have a larger effect but the point still stands that having a larger mass flow of air will still help to keep the turbocharger spinning than if the intake airflow was throttled.

As a rule the excess air will quench the combustion temperature and compromise available energy. There have been CI engines that throttled the air at lower power (throttle settings) to aid efficiency. Just pumping air in and out sans combustion is not gainful.

Your first statement is incorrect.
Your second statement is incorrect.
Your third statement is incorrect.

Hey - three strikes - you're out!

[TAG]

Lewis' qualifying time today was the fastest time recorded since Mark Webber's pole in 2010. These cars lack the double diffusers of that era, they have markedly smaller wings and subsequently less downforce, and most importantly they are only allowed to use DRS in the DRS zones not in the entirety of the track as it used to be back then.

...all this while using 30% less fuel.

Respek.

[Silent Storm]

Lewis' qualifying time today was the fastest time recorded since Mark Webber's pole in 2010. These cars lack the double diffusers of that era, they have markedly smaller wings and subsequently less downforce, and most importantly they are only allowed to use DRS in the DRS zones not in the entirety of the track as it used to be back then.

...all this while using 30% less fuel.

Respek.

Less downforce hence less drag. These cars are faster in acceleration and on the straights on a track like Spa you can make up that time on the straights.

[TAG]

Lewis' qualifying time today was the fastest time recorded since Mark Webber's pole in 2010. These cars lack the double diffusers of that era, they have markedly smaller wings and subsequently less downforce, and most importantly they are only allowed to use DRS in the DRS zones not in the entirety of the track as it used to be back then.

...all this while using 30% less fuel.

Respek.

Less downforce hence less drag. These cars are faster in acceleration and on the straights on a track like Spa you can make up that time on the straights.

Not so much time to be made up apparently given today's results with the two Mercedes drivers going in differing directions. Don't kid yourself. If you don't get sector 2 right in Spa, you're not assured of anything.

Anyway, there's the DRS and fuel issues to contend with, don't forget about those.