Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 9 votes

2014 Power Units


  • Please log in to reply
1459 replies to this topic

#951 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 23 December 2013 - 22:35

2014 F1 V6 Turbo Engine Battle - Ferrari vs Mercedes vs Renault vs Honda (2015)

 



Advertisement

#952 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 24 December 2013 - 03:43

So here is a funny question:
 
Do the regs stipulate the turbo has to be mechanically coupled to the exhaust?


The turbine has to be coupled to the same shaft as the compressor.

Not sure what you mean by "mechanically coupled to the exhaust". The turbo has to be physically attached to the exhaust pipe, otherwidse it probably wouldn't work all that well.

#953 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 24 December 2013 - 21:01

The turbine has to be coupled to the same shaft as the compressor.

Not sure what you mean by "mechanically coupled to the exhaust". The turbo has to be physically attached to the exhaust pipe, otherwidse it probably wouldn't work all that well.

 

What I mean is that is there anything to keep them from making a turbine that "retracts" out of the exhaust at low rpm, while the electric engine is turning the compressor, and then pushing it back into the flow at the appropriate moment in the torque curve?  I don't know what the crossover rpm would be like where pulling the exhaust out with the electric motor would be more efficient than an open port, but it seems like there would be a range in which the transition from an open exhaust port>turbine crossover>ERS that would be conducive to such a thing.  You couldn't make a variable-angle turbine blade at 150,000 rpm, but it seems doable to be able to pop it out of the way of the exhaust based on some sort of simple torque-difference mechanical transmission/throwout bearing contraption on the turbine axle/electric assist assembly.

 

/ Maybe not.  I'm just hoping for some sort of "surprise-clever" mechanical technology....



#954 chumma

chumma
  • Member

  • 938 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 24 December 2013 - 21:20

What I mean is that is there anything to keep them from making a turbine that "retracts" out of the exhaust at low rpm, while the electric engine is turning the compressor, and then pushing it back into the flow at the appropriate moment in the torque curve? I don't know what the crossover rpm would be like where pulling the exhaust out with the electric motor would be more efficient than an open port, but it seems like there would be a range in which the transition from an open exhaust port>turbine crossover>ERS that would be conducive to such a thing. You couldn't make a variable-angle turbine blade at 150,000 rpm, but it seems doable to be able to pop it out of the way of the exhaust based on some sort of simple torque-difference mechanical transmission/throwout bearing contraption on the turbine axle/electric assist assembly.

/ Maybe not. I'm just hoping for some sort of "surprise-clever" mechanical technology....


But hopefully no silver bullets! I dont want the title decided by mid season because of loopholes/silver bullets. Im all for clever tech but not so it makes a car unbeatable....unless its a McLaren :)

#955 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,314 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 24 December 2013 - 21:56

What I mean is that is there anything to keep them from making a turbine that "retracts" out of the exhaust at low rpm, while the electric engine is turning the compressor, and then pushing it back into the flow at the appropriate moment in the torque curve?  I don't know what the crossover rpm would be like where pulling the exhaust out with the electric motor would be more efficient than an open port, but it seems like there would be a range in which the transition from an open exhaust port>turbine crossover>ERS that would be conducive to such a thing.  You couldn't make a variable-angle turbine blade at 150,000 rpm, but it seems doable to be able to pop it out of the way of the exhaust based on some sort of simple torque-difference mechanical transmission/throwout bearing contraption on the turbine axle/electric assist assembly.

 

/ Maybe not.  I'm just hoping for some sort of "surprise-clever" mechanical technology....

 

You are implying that it would sometimes be more efficient to run normally aspirated than to use the turbo in the normal way?

 

I've not heard that before.



#956 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 December 2013 - 06:19

What I mean is that is there anything to keep them from making a turbine that "retracts" out of the exhaust at low rpm, while the electric engine is turning the compressor, and then pushing it back into the flow at the appropriate moment in the torque curve?  I don't know what the crossover rpm would be like where pulling the exhaust out with the electric motor would be more efficient than an open port, but it seems like there would be a range in which the transition from an open exhaust port>turbine crossover>ERS that would be conducive to such a thing.  You couldn't make a variable-angle turbine blade at 150,000 rpm, but it seems doable to be able to pop it out of the way of the exhaust based on some sort of simple torque-difference mechanical transmission/throwout bearing contraption on the turbine axle/electric assist assembly.
 
/ Maybe not.  I'm just hoping for some sort of "surprise-clever" mechanical technology....


Like a wastegate?

A wastegate diverts exhaust around the turbine and out through the exhaust, bypassing the turbo.

Usually the wastegate dumps the exhaust to prevent overspeeding of the turbo. In this case that job will be done by the MGU-H, generating electricity to be sent to the battery (Energy Store or ES) or the MGU-K.

With the MGUH also able to drive the turbo at low speeds, bypassing wouldn't be of any benefit at that point either.

#957 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 27 December 2013 - 14:13

I hope they don't force one of those cut-and-right engine freeze with these engines. If the idea is to have benefit for road car manufacturing with more efficient engines, they have to allow continuous leeway for the manufacturers to develop engines on this front. At some point they would be looking to go towards the in-line four cylinders as well..



#958 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 27 December 2013 - 16:43

I hope they don't force one of those cut-and-right engine freeze with these engines. If the idea is to have benefit for road car manufacturing with more efficient engines, they have to allow continuous leeway for the manufacturers to develop engines on this front. At some point they would be looking to go towards the in-line four cylinders as well..


I agree. Once the rest of the power unit package is more developed then the combustion engine portion could be swapped out for something smaller, maybe even an alternate fuel such as hydrogen or a market-relevant tech like a diesel. Or better yet, revive the Wankel rotary!

#959 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 4,751 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 27 December 2013 - 17:09

Revive the Wankel Rotary?

 

That would be perverse in addition to all those energy retrieving addings on the cars since the Wankel  engine is known to be far less fuel efficient becouse of the losses due to cumbistion chamber leaks. So that would really make all efforts to `save fuel` redundant and a waste of efforts.

Though it would probably `silence` the many advocates of loud engines we have on this forum since the wankels are terribly loud so that will please many out here who keep screaming hell about the loss of loudness on F1 engines.

 

Henri



Advertisement

#960 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 27 December 2013 - 17:31

Revive the Wankel Rotary?
 
That would be perverse in addition to all those energy retrieving addings on the cars since the Wankel  engine is known to be far less fuel efficient becouse of the losses due to cumbistion chamber leaks. So that would really make all efforts to `save fuel` redundant and a waste of efforts.
Though it would probably `silence` the many advocates of loud engines we have on this forum since the wankels are terribly loud so that will please many out here who keep screaming hell about the loss of loudness on F1 engines.
 
Henri


I was kidding (mostly) but F1 could attempt to turn itself into a high intensity laboratory for car technologies. If everyone had to run a rotary, or if the rotary option merely looked to have more potential, how long would it be before solutions to some of its disadvantages were found? I think that's what they're trying to do with hybrids - use the power of competition to boost the development rate of such technologies.

#961 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 6,013 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 December 2013 - 19:02

Revive the Wankel Rotary?

 

Try repeating that five times :lol:

 

I was kidding (mostly) but F1 could attempt to turn itself into a high intensity laboratory for car technologies. If everyone had to run a rotary, or if the rotary option merely looked to have more potential, how long would it be before solutions to some of its disadvantages were found? I think that's what they're trying to do with hybrids - use the power of competition to boost the development rate of such technologies.

 

That's rather poor reasoning really. You can't assume they would just come up with something, especially when the sole reason they're using those engines is because the regulations force them too, not due to any desire to use the technology.



#962 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 28 December 2013 - 05:07

Try repeating that five times :lol:
 

 
That's rather poor reasoning really. You can't assume they would just come up with something, especially when the sole reason they're using those engines is because the regulations force them too, not due to any desire to use the technology.


Are you saying it's poor reasoning that F1 teams would find innovative solutions to gain a competitive advantage?

And it looks like the rotary is well suited for range extender use in cars, as we will see in the next few years.

#963 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,210 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 28 December 2013 - 08:42

Are you saying it's poor reasoning that F1 teams would find innovative solutions to gain a competitive advantage?

And it looks like the rotary is well suited for range extender use in cars, as we will see in the next few years.

What are these innovative solutions? Are they doing anything that is not already being used or developed elsewhere?



#964 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 29 December 2013 - 02:40

You are implying that it would sometimes be more efficient to run normally aspirated than to use the turbo in the normal way?

 

I've not heard that before.

 

When have you heard of then use of a turbo assisted by an electric motor before in a "normal" way......?



#965 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 29 December 2013 - 03:00

Like a wastegate?

A wastegate diverts exhaust around the turbine and out through the exhaust, bypassing the turbo.

 

 

 Not like a wastegate.  There could be overlap at low rpms, maybe even just at the start, where running then compressor strictly electric could provide an advantage.  Everyone is assuming a direct-coupled drive, simply because that is the way they've always been used. 

 

 I think starts are going to be potentially very different next year, with some curious engine notes. The hysteresis of the IC torque versus an ERS start, tied into the turbo being augmented electrically, means maybe you want a more free flowing exhaust when you have potentially big rpm swings coming off a shift.  Like during a launch, or maybe on circuits where you have a Mickey Mouse section that doesn't allow for a full-torque situation to happen.   Places like Monaco and Hungary, maybe the ratio of energy recovered to the fuel limit favors a greater use of electric with the Power Unit, so you just keep the motor pumped by the electric motor on the turbo; does the IC engineer *want* something in the exhaust pipe if it doesn't need to be there? 

At the higher average speed circuit the ratio will be different.

 

 Having the electric augmentation of the turbo makes the math less obvious, I think.  Maybe not, but again... it's off season......



#966 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 3,970 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 29 December 2013 - 16:03

Omnicorse.it reports that the 2014 Renault Power Unit may not be ready for Jerez on 28 Janurary. It reports in the last meeting of F1 teams, Christian Horner asked for a one week delay of the first test, but other teams did not accept. This is a Renault problem, not a Red Bull problem. There seem to be some issues with the power unit and possibly the turbocharger. OmniCorse reports Mercedes & Ferrari have stated they want a two week gap between the Jerez test and the 2nd Bahrain test to analyze all of the data from Jerez and make the necessary changes. Very interesting..

 

http://www.omnicorse...i-test-di-jerez



#967 midgrid

midgrid
  • Member

  • 4,600 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 29 December 2013 - 16:16

Ooh, it turns out that ALL the 2014 engines are the worst!

#968 SealTheDiffuser

SealTheDiffuser
  • Member

  • 889 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 29 December 2013 - 16:31

Ooh, it turns out that ALL the 2014 engines are the worst!

 

it s just the rules that demand only a few units used over the seaon( 4 or 5?), the turbo seems to be the achilles heel, see Merc fire



#969 AlexS

AlexS
  • Member

  • 2,338 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 29 December 2013 - 17:25

I get a feeling  that the Pirelli 2013 exploding tires would be multiplied ten fold with this engines...



#970 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,314 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 29 December 2013 - 18:43

When have you heard of then use of a turbo assisted by an electric motor before in a "normal" way......?

 

I'm not an engineer, but I think I'm beginning to understand what you are talking about.

 

If the turbo is being driven by electric power, because there is insufficient exhaust flow, then it will presumably act as a kind of extractor pump, creating a low pressure area between the exhaust valves and the turbo which will tend to 'suck' the exhause gases out of the cylinders. You are suggesting that it might be better, in this situation, to have an open exhaust pipe, since the turbocharger can be spun more efficiently without the drag created by the slow-moving exhaust?



#971 Gintonious

Gintonious
  • Member

  • 966 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 29 December 2013 - 20:39

Interesting that renault want the delay for the first test, also interesting that the other teams want more time to data check. These things are going to cost a fortune!



#972 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 668 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 29 December 2013 - 21:17

I get a feeling  that the Pirelli 2013 exploding tires would be multiplied ten fold with this engines...

Nah, Teams have had tons of time to test and retest these engines to the nth degree. Issues will probably be small but then again i could be wrong.



#973 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,613 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 30 December 2013 - 15:44

I get a feeling  that the Pirelli 2013 exploding tires would be multiplied ten fold with this engines...

 

It'll be an explosive season.

 

:smoking:



#974 naukkis

naukkis
  • New Member

  • 22 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 30 December 2013 - 17:59

 You couldn't make a variable-angle turbine blade at 150,000 rpm, but it seems doable to be able to pop it out of the way of the exhaust based on some sort of simple torque-difference mechanical transmission/throwout bearing contraption on the turbine axle/electric assist assembly.

 

 

There's no such a thing as variable-angle turbine. At turbocharges rotating speeds turbines are as solid as possible always. You are confusing it to variable geometry turbochargers which have variable angle vanes around turbine and those kind of turbochargers could have used in F1 too but they denied by rules all but solid-geometry turbine housings.



#975 mlsnoopy

mlsnoopy
  • Member

  • 2,356 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 30 December 2013 - 18:16

I agree. Once the rest of the power unit package is more developed then the combustion engine portion could be swapped out for something smaller, maybe even an alternate fuel such as hydrogen or a market-relevant tech like a diesel. Or better yet, revive the Wankel rotary!

 

I wonder if the could use hydrogen fuel cells in Formula E.



#976 ATM_Andy

ATM_Andy
  • Member

  • 1,482 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 December 2013 - 21:46

I'm not an engineer, but I think I'm beginning to understand what you are talking about.

If the turbo is being driven by electric power, because there is insufficient exhaust flow, then it will presumably act as a kind of extractor pump, creating a low pressure area between the exhaust valves and the turbo which will tend to 'suck' the exhause gases out of the cylinders. You are suggesting that it might be better, in this situation, to have an open exhaust pipe, since the turbocharger can be spun more efficiently without the drag created by the slow-moving exhaust?


Good form of antilag.

#977 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 31 December 2013 - 14:25

I'm not an engineer, but I think I'm beginning to understand what you are talking about.

 

If the turbo is being driven by electric power, because there is insufficient exhaust flow, then it will presumably act as a kind of extractor pump, creating a low pressure area between the exhaust valves and the turbo which will tend to 'suck' the exhause gases out of the cylinders. You are suggesting that it might be better, in this situation, to have an open exhaust pipe, since the turbocharger can be spun more efficiently without the drag created by the slow-moving exhaust?

 

 I think that in any situation where typically the kinetic energy of the extraction side is helping it's innevitably removing energy from the compressor side, at least in a traditional turbo.   For that matter, if that's the case, I'd also think that it would be sort of sloppy programing of the ECU,

 

 I don't foresee scavenging energy from excess turbo use to be an efficient way to recover energy, because of the light weight of the components and the knock on effect of interacting negatively with the IC process.  You'd want to help spin it up off throttle for energy conservation, but on throttle I think there would be two possible strategies, depending - keeping the engine blown full time, or trying to keep the exhaust clear while the electric motor optimizes the compressor side.  

 

 Another thing occurs to me, in that really next year will be about torque management.  With ERS being a little bit more open (it should be FULLY OPEN, ridiculous... ), there could be times when you'd want to keep the engine wound up into the power band *constantly*, and then use ERS to pull the car into a transitionary range for the IC motor.

 

 Further, I can also imagine that there could be times when the ECU keeps the motor running in the power band while the ERS buffers the torque.  It may seem counter intuitive from an fuel management standpoint, but I don't know what happens to the inefficiencies of fuel management while the IC transitions up to the power band.  It may turn out that it's more energy efficient to keep the IC motor spinning at a more constant rate in order to avoid sucking more fuel coming out of certain corners.



#978 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 31 December 2013 - 14:31

Ok, more fun.

 

 Do the regs permit a team from disengaging the IC side in one gear, say 2nd, using the electric side to get to 3rd while the engine spins into the power band non-linearly to accelleration?  

 

 The electric motor could be more traction-efficient in some situations, and during those situations you could get the extractor side of the turbo out of the exhaust and spin the compressor and engine up to the power band without energy loss of pulling the car through a less energy efficieny-optimal phase of the IC side.  Circuits where you had lots of momentary downshifts could benefit from that, the IC motor stays in the power band, you set the gearing so that it optimizes wheel spin relative to the E motor.



#979 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,859 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 01 January 2014 - 17:53

Ok, more fun.

 

 Do the regs permit a team from disengaging the IC side in one gear, say 2nd, using the electric side to get to 3rd while the engine spins into the power band non-linearly to accelleration?  

 

That is just one of the many areas that the FIA will need to give clarification on because there are very clever ways in which you can configure the electric motor and internal combustion engine to manage manage power.

 

I'm expecting teams to equip spotters with high-end microphones so that they can listen to the engines of competitors and try to guess how their power units are configured. 



Advertisement

#980 0Fritz

0Fritz
  • Member

  • 352 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 January 2014 - 01:25

Not sure if this topic was already raised, but with the much wider torque map in the new engines, will we now (finally) go back to decent rev countrers again, instead of these current 3 colour light codes weve seen in the past 6 years?



#981 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:22

Not sure if this topic was already raised, but with the much wider torque map in the new engines, will we now (finally) go back to decent rev countrers again, instead of these current 3 colour light codes weve seen in the past 6 years?


In the car? I doubt it - lights can be placed in the steering wheel or on the cowl. Tachometers take up more space.

#982 Tapz63

Tapz63
  • Member

  • 233 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 02 January 2014 - 03:26

Not sure if this topic was already raised, but with the much wider torque map in the new engines, will we now (finally) go back to decent rev countrers again, instead of these current 3 colour light codes weve seen in the past 6 years?


The lights are there to indicate to the driver when they should change gear in the easiest way possible. What would you want them to change it too, a standard car one?

#983 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 02 January 2014 - 21:53

Ok, more fun.
 
 Do the regs permit a team from disengaging the IC side in one gear, say 2nd, using the electric side to get to 3rd while the engine spins into the power band non-linearly to accelleration?  
 
 The electric motor could be more traction-efficient in some situations, and during those situations you could get the extractor side of the turbo out of the exhaust and spin the compressor and engine up to the power band without energy loss of pulling the car through a less energy efficieny-optimal phase of the IC side.  Circuits where you had lots of momentary downshifts could benefit from that, the IC motor stays in the power band, you set the gearing so that it optimizes wheel spin relative to the E motor.


The problem with electric drive only is that it is restricted to 160hp.

In practical terms, the electric motor cannot drive the car directly. It has to be connected by gears to the engine's crankshaft. It can be disconnected using a clutch, so that the car is solely powered by the ICE, but the reverse is not true.

#984 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,859 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 02 January 2014 - 23:36

The problem with electric drive only is that it is restricted to 160hp.

In practical terms, the electric motor cannot drive the car directly. It has to be connected by gears to the engine's crankshaft. It can be disconnected using a clutch, so that the car is solely powered by the ICE, but the reverse is not true.

 

160hp is a lot of power for a car that barely weighs more than half a tone. Sure's it won't be enough to break speed records around Monza but there are slow and medium speed corners where linear and low power would be useful.



#985 itsademo

itsademo
  • Member

  • 403 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 January 2014 - 01:52

I'm not an engineer, but I think I'm beginning to understand what you are talking about.

 

If the turbo is being driven by electric power, because there is insufficient exhaust flow, then it will presumably act as a kind of extractor pump, creating a low pressure area between the exhaust valves and the turbo which will tend to 'suck' the exhause gases out of the cylinders. You are suggesting that it might be better, in this situation, to have an open exhaust pipe, since the turbocharger can be spun more efficiently without the drag created by the slow-moving exhaust?

I could be wrong but my understanding is that a turbo charger is driven by exclusively by the exhaust gasses and as soon as you start adding other ways to "power" the compressor you are then talking more about a hybrid turbo/supercharger.

Is such a thing is allowed within the regs?

I doubt it but perhaps it is yet another hole the FIA have missed


Edited by itsademo, 03 January 2014 - 01:53.


#986 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,093 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 03 January 2014 - 06:02

I could be wrong but my understanding is that a turbo charger is driven by exclusively by the exhaust gasses and as soon as you start adding other ways to "power" the compressor you are then talking more about a hybrid turbo/supercharger.

Is such a thing is allowed within the regs?

I doubt it but perhaps it is yet another hole the FIA have missed

No, it is allowed.



#987 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 356 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 03 January 2014 - 08:42

Page 86 in this document shows the allowed energy flows.

 

MGU-H is the turbine-compressor unit with electrical motor coupled.

MGU-K is the electrical motor which is coupled to the internal combustion engine.



#988 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,036 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 January 2014 - 09:19

 a hybrid turbo/supercharger.

 

 

It is allowed and I've actually been calling it an electrocharger, because I think it sounds much sexier than MGH-H. I like old style engineering terms when people would come up with cool names for new devices instead of bloody TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) or even ETLAs (Extended Three Letter Acronyms).

 

As in, if a supercharger uses mechanical means to force induction, and a "turbocharger" is actually a turbine supercharger that uses aerodynamic means to force induction, this uses electric means to force induction.



#989 Richard T

Richard T
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 03 January 2014 - 09:42

Electrocharger.. I love it PYR! (PayasYouRace)

#990 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 7,487 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 03 January 2014 - 09:47

I think the official technical term is 'electric turbocompounding'.


Edited by Timstr11, 03 January 2014 - 09:48.


#991 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 03 January 2014 - 13:27

It is allowed and I've actually been calling it an electrocharger, because I think it sounds much sexier than MGH-H. I like old style engineering terms when people would come up with cool names for new devices instead of bloody TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) or even ETLAs (Extended Three Letter Acronyms).
 
As in, if a supercharger uses mechanical means to force induction, and a "turbocharger" is actually a turbine supercharger that uses aerodynamic means to force induction, this uses electric means to force induction.


MGU-H only refers to the motor/generator unit which is connected to the turbocharger.

#992 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,036 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 January 2014 - 13:47

MGU-H only refers to the motor/generator unit which is connected to the electrocharger.

 

FIFY ;)



#993 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,859 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 04 January 2014 - 09:33

 

 

Nikki Lauda: "Suddenly you have to take care of things like water pressure or intercooling. Oil and water must be in a precise temperature window. If it goes beyond just a few degrees above a certain limit, it tears up everything."
Read more at http://en.espnf1.com...l2ISxjJOKHkX.99

 

Auch! Sounds like the engines will be sensitive to a minor failures that have a domino effect on other areas.



#994 Bunchies

Bunchies
  • Member

  • 1,499 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 04 January 2014 - 10:24

Revive the Wankel Rotary?

 

That would be perverse in addition to all those energy retrieving addings on the cars since the Wankel  engine is known to be far less fuel efficient becouse of the losses due to cumbistion chamber leaks. So that would really make all efforts to `save fuel` redundant and a waste of efforts.

Though it would probably `silence` the many advocates of loud engines we have on this forum since the wankels are terribly loud so that will please many out here who keep screaming hell about the loss of loudness on F1 engines.

 

Henri

 

I was under the impression that it is the shape of the combustion chamber along with the rotor tip movement not allowing for complete combustion due to the position of the leading spark plugs? Didn't mazda help this issue by using an additional set of spark plugs in the r26b?

 

Anyway, I'm just speculating. As a decade long wankel owner, I'm always interested in these things.



#995 Boing 2

Boing 2
  • Member

  • 2,434 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 04 January 2014 - 11:23

Good form of antilag.

 

Surely the antilag is that the compressor is electrically operated at low revs, technically there shouldn't be any lag.



#996 syolase

syolase
  • Member

  • 200 posts
  • Joined: February 13

Posted 04 January 2014 - 11:43

Auch! Sounds like the engines will be sensitive to a minor failures that have a domino effect on other areas.

 

It just gets more attention because the regulation change. Im pretty sure that its the same with last year's car as well. To be at the front, you have to live on the edge.



#997 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 04 January 2014 - 12:35

160hp is a lot of power for a car that barely weighs more than half a tone. Sure's it won't be enough to break speed records around Monza but there are slow and medium speed corners where linear and low power would be useful.


160hp may be a lot for a lightweight car, but it is not that much in F1 terms, especially since low gears are about acceleration.

As I pointed out earlier, it would be impractical to use electric only in any given gear.

However, it was originally proposed to have the cars run electric only in the pits. This would require switching off the engine (fuel and ignition). In the pit lane it is more practical because a) the speed is limited and b) there is no sustained acceleration period - the only acceleration is out of the box.

#998 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 653 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 07 January 2014 - 05:49

As I pointed out earlier, it would be impractical to use electric only in any given gear.
 

 

 That would be the case if you were trying to substitute electric for IC.  What I'm talking about is a "staged" effect, where maybe 2nd gear is extremely short.  You'd plan for it to be where you'd expect to lose traction in "most circumstances" in the IC engine's transition to maximum torque.  So instead of having the IC engine pull through that region, it disengages and revs up to the maximum toque efficiency while the electric motor bridges the gap to the next gear. 
 

So you wouldn't necessarily think of it as "1st>2nd>3rd", it would be more like "1st> (traction saving-IC revving mode) > "2nd" gear".  You keep the IC engine in it's power band more, you don't waste fuel having it lug up to that point, and you don't lose as much momentum as simply cutting the drive to the wheels in a "lazy" shift (which I think is something else that might pop up...)...



#999 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,377 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 07 January 2014 - 10:23

Using the energy to spin the turbo back with no lag will have exactly the same effect. It is a sensible and interesting idea as it is.



Advertisement

#1000 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 811 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 07 January 2014 - 11:26

I have a feeling that with the evolution of engine management software coupled with the ERS that we will see a very smooth power curve regardless of torque with the 2014 powertrains.

 

I maintain my position that the difference between the engines will be governed by the efficiency of their respective ERS'.   If one manufacturer has an ERS efficiency advantage it means they will be less reliant on the IC part of the powertrain and can either save fuel/run lighter or turn up the wick at the required moments.