Honda F1 project leader Yusuke Hasegawa has outlined a number of reasons why Honda has been struggling so badly in the beginning of the 2017 Formula One season. He confirmed that lots of problems were not discovered while running on the dynamo meter.
something must be different with the hotter gas (if its pressure and mass-flow are the same)gruntguru wrote: ↑09 Aug 2022, 05:20.. Assume we have a 100% efficient expander, 5 bar turbine inlet, 1 bar turbine outlet and a mass flow of 0.5 kg/s.
1. turbine inlet 800*K -> 148 kW and turbine outlet temp = 505*K
2. turbine inlet 1000*K -> 185 kW and turbine outlet temp = 631*K
Same pressure ratio but much higher power for hotter gas.
The hotter gas occupies a greater volume in accordance with the ideal gas law Pv=nRT.Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑09 Aug 2022, 14:00something must be different with the hotter gas (if its pressure and mass-flow are the same)gruntguru wrote: ↑09 Aug 2022, 05:20.. Assume we have a 100% efficient expander, 5 bar turbine inlet, 1 bar turbine outlet and a mass flow of 0.5 kg/s.
1. turbine inlet 800*K -> 148 kW and turbine outlet temp = 505*K
2. turbine inlet 1000*K -> 185 kW and turbine outlet temp = 631*K
Same pressure ratio but much higher power for hotter gas.
greater exhaust system volume ?
some effect of viscosity ?
I suppose, If it's actual published or Honda released information or photos of the ra622H depicting the architecture sure, but a lot of the conversations read as disagreements on physics or thermal dynamics and overall conjecture. Discussion on CAC bypass and what not could be in its own thread.Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑09 Aug 2022, 18:33they are in response to godl's apparently popular posts about features apparently unique to the Honda
Why? Do you have a source? That would mean penalties in Spa.
Why penalties for ERS/ES upgrades?.
Nanotechnology is good for power density of the ES.ispano6 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2022, 10:11I suppose, If it's actual published or Honda released information or photos of the ra622H depicting the architecture sure, but a lot of the conversations read as disagreements on physics or thermal dynamics and overall conjecture. Discussion on CAC bypass and what not could be in its own thread.Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑09 Aug 2022, 18:33they are in response to godl's apparently popular posts about features apparently unique to the Honda
I would mention Honda Research Institute and what is in store for the ERS and ES upgrades that are expected to be applied before the Sept deadline. I can't say with 100% certainty but I reckon there are developments in the field of nanotechnology that may be a step from the ES introduced last year.
Or in other developments, would fluoride ion batteries be allowed to be introduced as an ES or is the chemistry restricted to lithium? Or could sodium ion batteries be introduced? A stretch perhaps, but not impossible. I tried to find details regarding the regulations restrictions and could not find information regarding the required chemistry.
.
Looking at this table and the technical regulations I'm getting the feeling RBPT want to postpone the new MGU-K. The regulations state that you can wait till the 5th event after the hom deadline with a new spec if all cars would incurr a penalty by taking it. By letting Max and Sergio both take the third and final penalty free K in Hungary all cars (incl AT) will receive a penalty if they take another K. They could have done this trick in Spa too since it's the last event before the hom deadline of sep 1st for ERS components but maybe it would look too obvious that it's being done tactically instead of a reliability need like in Hungary. I expect a new ES and CE in Spa for Max and Sergio and later for AT. And the new K in US.Wouter wrote: ↑10 Aug 2022, 23:26.
Uses elements until now exept a new gearbox for Max and Vettel. Credits: @THUR.
https://i.ibb.co/MZdfbnR/F1-2022-Used-E ... 4-race.jpg
Alexf1 wrote: ↑12 Aug 2022, 21:47Looking at this table and the technical regulations I'm getting the feeling RBPT/HRC want to postpone the introduction of the new MGU-K. The regulations state that you can wait till the 5th event after the hom deadline with a new spec if all cars would incur a penalty by taking it. By letting Max and Sergio both take the third and final penalty free K in Hungary all cars (incl AT) will receive a penalty if they take another K. They could have done this trick in Spa too since it's the last event before the hom deadline of sep 1st for ERS components but maybe it would look too obvious that it's being done tactically instead of a reliability need like in Hungary. I expect the new spec ES and CE in Spa for Max and Sergio and maybe later for AT. The new K can be introduced in US and would only have to do 4 events in 2022 which would give RBPT/HRC coming winter to optimize software even further.Wouter wrote: ↑10 Aug 2022, 23:26.
Uses elements until now exept a new gearbox for Max and Vettel. Credits: @THUR.
https://i.ibb.co/MZdfbnR/F1-2022-Used-E ... 4-race.jpg
I'm assuming you didn't watch the NHK special on Honda's application of carbon nanotubes they developed 9years earlier that were applied to their ES upgrade last season and the later carbon nanoribbons that were described in a December '21 article. Don't know why you people brush off this type of research as buzzwords because it isn't. It's real R&D that gets applied in novel ways. And F1 is one of the very reasons to apply it. Their application of nanotubes isn't about battery chemistry, it's actually about resistance and the ability to drain and recharge faster than conventional carbon nanomaterials specifically utilizing the structural orientation of the nanotubes.aleks_ader wrote: ↑11 Aug 2022, 16:38Nanotechnology is just buzzword. I believe battery chemistry is slow and steady development of marginal gains and compromises. I don't expect miracles here in such short time.
All thanks to Wazari-San and team for all their hard work behind the CNT cellsispano6 wrote: ↑14 Aug 2022, 10:38I'm assuming you didn't watch the NHK special on Honda's application of carbon nanotubes they developed 9years earlier that were applied to their ES upgrade last season and the later carbon nanoribbons that were described in a December '21 article. Don't know why you people brush off this type of research as buzzwords because it isn't. It's real R&D that gets applied in novel ways. And F1 is one of the very reasons to apply it. Their application of nanotubes isn't about battery chemistry, it's actually about resistance and the ability to drain and recharge faster than conventional carbon nanomaterials specifically utilizing the structural orientation of the nanotubes.aleks_ader wrote: ↑11 Aug 2022, 16:38Nanotechnology is just buzzword. I believe battery chemistry is slow and steady development of marginal gains and compromises. I don't expect miracles here in such short time.
