24 replies to this topic

[desmo]

Some pictures a friend sent that he took of the Peugeot F1 engine at their rebuild shop. Click on the images for high-resolution versions.

[Todd]

Look how short the stroke is. The photo with the finger in it really puts these engines' dimensions in perspective. No wonder they can live with such high crank speeds. Well, maybe not the Peugeots, but other F1 engines with similar bore and stroke ratios.

[Halfwitt]

I don't know how recent an engine this is, but they were using direct acting cams, rather than the finger follower types which seem to be the norm today, and butterfly throttles. Note the odd looking tappet bucket in the bottom right of the lowest picture with the domed ridge. Note also that the valves are the radial type.

I assume also that the green thing on the bottom of the tappet bucket is a seal for the pneumatic valve return. Is this correct?

[Wuzak]

Thanks desmo.

Do you know what the engines are being used for now???

[ZoRG]

I assume also that the green thing on the bottom of the tappet bucket is a seal for the pneumatic valve return. Is this correct?

I thought that they used a form of PTFE for the seals? Usually ptfe is white or black, never seen it in color.
Maybe they use something different.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Wuzak
Thanks desmo.

Do you know what the engines are being used for now???

well they were asiatechs for awhile ..

[Wuzak]

I notice that part of the counterweights are bolted on.

Is this usual?

[ZoRG]

I notice that part of the counterweights are bolted on. Is this usual?

Yes, I've seen a Ferrari crank, looks exactly the same.

[J. Edlund]

Originally posted by ZoRG
I notice that part of the counterweights are bolted on. Is this usual?

Yes, I've seen a Ferrari crank, looks exactly the same.

Could it be so that they are using heavymetal counterweights, and they are therefore bolted onto the crankshaft? Heavy metal should be able to make the counterweights smaller. I've seen a picture on an older Ferrari F1 engine, it used heavy metal counterweights, but there they were in the form of solid cylinders that were probably pressed into the steel counterweight.

The green thing on the tappet bucket is probably the air spring seal. A guess is that the seal isn't PTFE, probably some sort of rubber or softer seal. PTFE is heat resistant and have low friction, that must be the reasons it's used as a seal at the valve stem. But this seal has probably a lower operational temperature so the material can be something else. Just a guess however.
Furthermore, the tappet bucket must be of some two piece design that allow a valve to be locked to it.

At the side of the intake runner it looks like some sort of plug, must be an air intake or outlet for the pneumatic springs.

The shaft and throttleplate in one piece was also an interresting design, all the throttleplates I've seen earlier have seemed to be more traditional shaft and plate screwed together.

[AndreasL]

The big version of picture 4 is not the same one as the small one. But one can still see that two distributors lie behind the camshafts.

Do F1 engines today still use distributors, or have they gone the way of street car engines to 1 coil per cylinder?

/Andreas

[ZoRG]

The reason for the crank weights might be manufacture related, ie oil ports, or could be for weight, if it was due to weight it could be argued that the heavier metals do the same job as bigger counters, however does not have the same arc, and thus does not increase by the same magnitude when spun at high rpm's.

As far as I know most cars run coil on plug and not distributor based systems, or maybe some sort of wasted spark type system to save a bit of weight.

[RDV]

but they were using direct acting cams, rather than the finger follower types which seem to be the norm today

All F1 engines running today are of the finger following type, this allows for better cam profiles, as a direct acting cam on a bucket will have problems of acceleration up cam cheeck , and tends to give severe wear and friction problems, plus needing very big buckets, thus increasing moving weight .

Note the odd looking tappet bucket in the bottom right of the lowest picture with the domed ridge

Domed ridge is a way of reducing cam cheek pressure, whilst giving high lift and duration... efectively cam profile can be softer as part of trajectory is controled by bucket(note cam profile cheek radius on end view). Downside is you must locate bucket to keep it in position (avoid rotating in bore)

Counterweights are of hi density material. Renault to my knowledge had used depleted uranium in some of its engines, but most have gone to tungsten now due to (percieved if not proved) health risk

[J. Edlund]

They use a coil on plug capacitor discharge ignition system, not that diffrent from the system that can be found in serial production Saabs, except that it has better performance and lower weight. It's completely controlled by the ECU without any mechanical parts. In TAG:s systems the capacitors are placed in the ECU and the cigar type coils direct on the plugs.

If you look at picture 2 you can see that it says A18 (possibly A16, it's difficult to see) on the carbon fibre cover. Peugeot A18 raced in 1999 I believe.

[ZoRG]

That bucket design is weird ... since it is just that bucket, I do not understand why it would need a seal, since it does not seem like it is able to attach to a valve to pull a valve up, It could also be designed like that(with a seal) to keep oil out the pneumatic system.

[J. Edlund]

Originally posted by ZoRG
That bucket design is weird ... since it is just that bucket, I do not understand why it would need a seal, since it does not seem like it is able to attach to a valve to pull a valve up, It could also be designed like that(with a seal) to keep oil out the pneumatic system.

It's probably made in two pieces, when they are separated the valve can be locked with something similar to a normal valve keeper.

If you take a look on this picture I think it will become clear: http://members.atlas...valvesystem.jpg

[ZoRG]

I suppose so ... however I do not see any provision for shims? Also the del west system looks completely different www.delwestusa.com any ideas?

[J. Edlund]

Originally posted by ZoRG
I suppose so ... however I do not see any provision for shims? Also the del west system looks completely different www.delwestusa.com any ideas?

The system on Del Wests webpage is a system for finger followers, with direct acting cams the system looks a little diffrent.

It seems that there is a sort of shim above the valve stem and keeper which then come into contact with the upper part of the bucket. By using diffrent thickness of those we can adjust it, this will also give a lower weight than a traditional shim.

[MRC]

Fantastic pictures desmo. Best close up shot of the side of an engine that I've seen. I always like to see more of the ancilliaries. It appears from the offset of the water pump center and the oil pump shaft, and the casting shape, that they are using gear type oil pumps for the scavenge section on this motor. And it appears there are 3 scavege sections.

[Rainer Nyberg]

They actually never "rebuild" any F1 engines these days. Very few parts are recycled after a GP. All main parts goes into the scrap container. This compares well with the number of engines built per year for a team (80-100 engines).

The teams who are using previous years spec engines, does not have any rebuilt units. They are all brand new engines but built to the previous years spec.

However the new "longer-life" engines for 2004 and beyond will possibly change this again.

[ZoRG]

It seems that there is a sort of shim above the valve stem and keeper which then come into contact with the upper part of the bucket. By using diffrent thickness of those we can adjust it, this will also give a lower weight than a traditional shim.

I still can't see any way for that bucket to attach to a valve?

[J. Edlund]

Originally posted by ZoRG
It seems that there is a sort of shim above the valve stem and keeper which then come into contact with the upper part of the bucket. By using diffrent thickness of those we can adjust it, this will also give a lower weight than a traditional shim.

I still can't see any way for that bucket to attach to a valve?

Look again and I think you will see it.

You pull the lower part of the bucket over the valve, place the keepers on the valvestem and move the lower part of the bucket upwards. Now the valve is locked to the bucket in one way. Place a lash cap on the valve stem above the keepers and the upper part of the bucket over that. As long there is an air pressure below the bucket and a camshaft above it will be locked in both directions.

[Greg Locock]

Great pics. I've never seen a V10 crank before, since I'm not interested in truck engines.

I wonder if they use bolt-on counterweights so that they can change the counterweighting on the fly? This might be necessary if the engine is run at different red lines, or they weren't too sure what the optimum would be when they tooled up.

Alternatively I like the idea of putting depleted uranium or whatever in them to give max counterweighting for minimum drag.

[J. Edlund]

Originally posted by Greg Locock
Great pics. I've never seen a V10 crank before, since I'm not interested in truck engines.

I wonder if they use bolt-on counterweights so that they can change the counterweighting on the fly? This might be necessary if the engine is run at different red lines, or they weren't too sure what the optimum would be when they tooled up.

Alternatively I like the idea of putting depleted uranium or whatever in them to give max counterweighting for minimum drag.

They use no flywheel, the clutch is bolted directly on the crankshaft.

I also think that they use some sort of program in which they can simulate crankshaft dynamics, the weight of the counterweights and the complete crankshaft and conrods are in other words already known before they have even started the making of the parts. The only thing that will change the need of counterweighting is if diffrent con-rods are used.

[Greg Locock]

Oh, we use those programs as well. Nonetheless, if you really want to optimise the main bearing loads then a bit of fine tuning on the real hardware is no bad idea, especially given that they will be operating (I'm guessing) somewhere near the 1st bending mode, so real life damping will start to affect the responses.

[ZoRG]

They use no flywheel, the clutch is bolted directly on the crankshaft

Those engines still used a "limited" flywheel and ring-gear, I have heard that in the newer engine they actually weld on the flywheel.