Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[bigjj]

Mr. Yasuaki Asaki is said to have left Honda, is it possible for him to go to rbpt full time or as a consultant?

[ispano6]

A brief bit about the 2023 PU.

Tetsushi Kakuda, Honda's F1 project leader and executive chief engineer, told reporters the company had worked to address reliability issues for 2023.

Verstappen won 15 of 22 races last season, and Red Bull 17 in all, but the Dutch driver retired from two of the first three rounds.

"Last year I believe all the power unit manufacturers prioritised performance in their development, and so did we," said Kakuda. "We made every effort to recover the performance lost due to the E10 fuel introduced by the regulation change.

"But as a result the internal load to the engine increased significantly compared to the previous year and the reliability was severely compromised. As a result several problems surfaced during the 2022 season."

He said Honda had further optimised control and energy management and worked with suppliers to improve the precision of parts and power unit assembly.

[Juzh]

For Verstappen 1 DNF was RB's integration fault and only 1 was Honda related. That said they did took a number of ICE penalties, so perhaps durability just wasn't there. 2 extra engines in a tight championship could be costly.

[organic]

For Verstappen 1 DNF was RB's integration fault and only 1 was Honda related. That said they did took a number of ICE penalties, so perhaps durability just wasn't there. 2 extra engines in a tight championship could be costly.

The Monza engine penalty always felt precautionary to me. Like they decided on the weekend itself because they saw they had such a large advantage over the field to do it. There were no rumours at all coming up to Monza nor were there any earlier in the season suggesting Honda would use more than 4

Plus more engines, more data collection about how the power unit is wearing with the new fuel? So they can optimize the reliability again

[AR3-GP]

I remember reading somewhere that the failure in Hungary was actually a broken crankshaft of some kind (either of the MGU-K or the ICE) It was a german interview iirc so the google translate didn't come off that well).

[saviour stivala]

I remember reading somewhere that the failure in Hungary was actually a broken crankshaft of some kind (either of the MGU-K or the ICE) It was a german interview iirc so the google translate didn't come off that well).

And I also remember reading that a crack was found on the bloke where its bolted to the chassis bulkhead. But in actual fact the part that broke was a part that is allowed to be replaced by the rules, meaning no FIA seals had to be broken. That engine as well as the one from Checo's car which was also replaced on Sunday morning while under park ferme where both placed back into the respective drivers engine pools.

[saviour stivala]

Honda F1 project leader:-''But as a result the internal load to the engine increased significantly''. Prior to the engine development freeze (2021) nobody was using some of the maximum parameters permitted by the engine rules because of reliability concerns, (compression, injection pressure, sparking and injections numbers)

[Cs98]

A brief bit about the 2023 PU.

Tetsushi Kakuda, Honda's F1 project leader and executive chief engineer, told reporters the company had worked to address reliability issues for 2023.

Verstappen won 15 of 22 races last season, and Red Bull 17 in all, but the Dutch driver retired from two of the first three rounds.

"Last year I believe all the power unit manufacturers prioritised performance in their development, and so did we," said Kakuda. "We made every effort to recover the performance lost due to the E10 fuel introduced by the regulation change.

"But as a result the internal load to the engine increased significantly compared to the previous year and the reliability was severely compromised. As a result several problems surfaced during the 2022 season."

He said Honda had further optimised control and energy management and worked with suppliers to improve the precision of parts and power unit assembly.

Did they make any mention if they were going to remedy those "internal load" reliability concerns?

[Henk_v]

For Verstappen 1 DNF was RB's integration fault and only 1 was Honda related. That said they did took a number of ICE penalties, so perhaps durability just wasn't there. 2 extra engines in a tight championship could be costly.

The Monza engine penalty always felt precautionary to me. Like they decided on the weekend itself because they saw they had such a large advantage over the field to do it. There were no rumours at all coming up to Monza nor were there any earlier in the season suggesting Honda would use more than 4

Plus more engines, more data collection about how the power unit is wearing with the new fuel? So they can optimize the reliability again

I also thought it was obvious tactics. Just a defence against any team trying to snatch some points by blowing through their engines in some sort of "hail Mary mode". Thye'd have enough engines to match strategies. Additionally they might have anticipated a " '21 silverstone" on Max. They'd limit the damage by taking the engine penalty at a venue of their choice, making a desperate move less attractive.

[Bill]

[AR3-GP]

This belongs in the General Honda F1 topic.

[saviour stivala]

2022 ICE part of the power unit rialability. Mercedes powered 8 car of which between them used 27 ICE'S. Honda powered 4 cars of which between them used 20 ICE'S. FERARRI powered 6 cars of which between them used 34 ICE'S. Renault powered 2 cars of which between them used 12 ICE'S.

[chrisc90]

2022 ICE part of the power unit rialability. Mercedes powered 8 car of which between them used 27 ICE'S. Honda powered 4 cars of which between them used 20 ICE'S. FERARRI powered 6 cars of which between them used 34 ICE'S. Renault powered 2 cars of which between them used 12 ICE'S.

Working on the laws of averages thats.....

Mercedes: 3.375 ICE per car
Honda: 5 ICE per car
Ferrari: 5.6 ICE per car
Renault: 6 ICE per car.

[Juzh]

For Verstappen 1 DNF was RB's integration fault and only 1 was Honda related. That said they did took a number of ICE penalties, so perhaps durability just wasn't there. 2 extra engines in a tight championship could be costly.

The Monza engine penalty always felt precautionary to me. Like they decided on the weekend itself because they saw they had such a large advantage over the field to do it. There were no rumours at all coming up to Monza nor were there any earlier in the season suggesting Honda would use more than 4

Plus more engines, more data collection about how the power unit is wearing with the new fuel? So they can optimize the reliability again

I also thought it was obvious tactics. Just a defence against any team trying to snatch some points by blowing through their engines in some sort of "hail Mary mode". Thye'd have enough engines to match strategies. Additionally they might have anticipated a " '21 silverstone" on Max. They'd limit the damage by taking the engine penalty at a venue of their choice, making a desperate move less attractive.

This tactic wouldn't work. After exhausting your ICE allowance you can only keep the last engine in your pool of available engines. Last year they took ICE #4 in beligum, then ICE #5 two races later in Italy. This automatically removed engine #4 from the pool, damage or no damage. This is done exactly for the purpose of preventing engine stockpiling.
You can use first 3 engines however you like.

[Big Tea]

The Monza engine penalty always felt precautionary to me. Like they decided on the weekend itself because they saw they had such a large advantage over the field to do it. There were no rumours at all coming up to Monza nor were there any earlier in the season suggesting Honda would use more than 4

Plus more engines, more data collection about how the power unit is wearing with the new fuel? So they can optimize the reliability again

I also thought it was obvious tactics. Just a defence against any team trying to snatch some points by blowing through their engines in some sort of "hail Mary mode". Thye'd have enough engines to match strategies. Additionally they might have anticipated a " '21 silverstone" on Max. They'd limit the damage by taking the engine penalty at a venue of their choice, making a desperate move less attractive.

This tactic wouldn't work. After exhausting your ICE allowance you can only keep the last engine in your pool of available engines. Last year they took ICE #4 in beligum, then ICE #5 two races later in Italy. This automatically removed engine #4 from the pool, damage or no damage. This is done exactly for the purpose of preventing engine stockpiling.
You can use first 3 engines however you like.

As the engine use rule was supposed to be 'cost cutting', surely it is no longer needed now all the teams have the same spending limit?

If one team believes it is more efficient for them to spend 5million on swapped/rebuilt engines than say wind tunnel or computer time, is it not a fair choice for them?

The maximum spend is the same if it goes on inch long protrusions or slots, or on whole engines.