2025/2026 Hybrid Powerunit speculation

[gruntguru]

Just thought of something. Is it possible to replace the MGU-H with a flywheel, maybe even a mechanical one?
Do the regulations ban this?
Going further, is using the exhaust this way to store and deploy power banned?

By the way. What did they add to the regs to ban so called "split turbos"? How long can turbos be?

Flywheel has been done in the early days of regen. Don't know if the current regs permit but it wouldn't compete with MGUK plus Li battery on energy density.

[Tommy Cookers]

.. Is it possible to replace the MGU-H with a flywheel, maybe even a mechanical one?
Do the regulations ban this?
Going further, is using the exhaust this way to store and deploy power banned?

imo 'everybody knew' it was banned wef 2013/2014 ie the current rules
the Williams CVT/flywheel group (Williams Hybrid Power) were then sold in 2014 to GKN
https://www.imeche.org/news-article/wil ... n-010414-2
another https://www.racecar-engineering.com/art ... tems-kers/

[mzso]

Flywheel has been done in the early days of regen. Don't know if the current regs permit but it wouldn't compete with MGUK plus Li battery on energy density.

When I said "replace" I thought of a flywheel for the turbo to combat turbo-lag.

banned wef 2012/2013
to keep out Williams

Typical... Is it banned for drive only, or universally?

[Holm86]

Just thought of something. Is it possible to replace the MGU-H with a flywheel, maybe even a mechanical one?
Do the regulations ban this?
Going further, is using the exhaust this way to store and deploy power banned?

By the way. What did they add to the regs to ban so called "split turbos"? How long can turbos be?

Referring to Drawing 4 of Appendix C3, the turbocharger compressor and turbine must satisfy the
following dimensional constraints. Only compressor and turbine wheels approved by the FIA
Technical Department will be allowed:

a. The compressor exducer blade outer diameter (A) must lie between 100mm and 110mm. For
the avoidance of doubt, no part of the compressor wheel (including blades, hub and any
blade/hub fillet radius) can have a diameter more than the upper limit and the maximum
diameter of the compressor wheel (including blades, hub and any blade/hub fillet radius)
cannot have a diameter smaller than the lower limit.
b. The compressor axial distance from the outside diameter of the inducer blade edge to rear
plane of exducer, at its outer diameter (B) must lie between 30mm and 35mm
c.
The turbine inducer blade outer diameter (C) must lie between 90mm and 100mm. For the
avoidance of doubt, no part of the turbine wheel (including blades, hub and any blade/hub fillet
radius) can have a diameter more than the upper limit and the maximum diameter of the
turbine wheel (including blades, hub and any blade/hub fillet radius) cannot have a diameter
smaller than the lower limit.
d. The turbine axial distance from the outside diameter of the exducer blade edge to forward
plane of inducer, at its outer diameter (D) must lie between 35mm and 40mm
e.
The maximum distance between the rear of the compressor exducer and the front of the
turbine inducer (E) will be 175mm

[mzso]

Wow, reading something like this makes me think F1 should be renamed to Prescription 1.

[wuzak]

Wow, reading something like this makes me think F1 should be renamed to Prescription 1.

It's almost like it is a formula of rules.

[diffuser]

“It’s just a bit of a shame we’re just – Formula 1’s just – taking that path of electric energy and we’ve had to shed all the downforce off the cars to support the battery power,” he said. “It should be fun to see some light, nimble, fast cars with a lot of downforce and just simplify the whole thing a little bit. Less so of an energy, battery, championship, science project and more of just a Formula 1 racing championship.”

What you think is a problem with the regs have nothing to do with electricity. It's just a choice they made on how to implement the regs. They didn't have to remove the MGU-H, they didn't have to ban regenerative braking on the front, they didn't have to limit regeneration per lap as low as it is now, and they didn't have to prevent using MGU-K while on throttle. They did all this cause this is what they wanted to do, under the gise of carbon neutrality. It wasn't the only route to "carbon neutrality". The 2026 regs is a choice by F1. I have my doubts about how exciting the regs will be but since I can't change them, I'll wait to see how they playout before criticizing.

[vorticism]

“It’s just a bit of a shame we’re just – Formula 1’s just – taking that path of electric energy and we’ve had to shed all the downforce off the cars to support the battery power,” he said. “It should be fun to see some light, nimble, fast cars with a lot of downforce and just simplify the whole thing a little bit. Less so of an energy, battery, championship, science project and more of just a Formula 1 racing championship.”

What you think is a problem with the regs have nothing to do with electricity. It's just a choice they made on how to implement the regs. They didn't have to remove the MGU-H, they didn't have to ban regenerative braking on the front, they didn't have to limit regeneration per lap as low as it is now, and they didn't have to prevent using MGU-K while on throttle. They did all this cause this is what they wanted to do, under the gise of carbon neutrality. It wasn't the only route to "carbon neutrality". The 2026 regs is a choice by F1. I have my doubts about how exciting the regs will be but since I can't change them, I'll wait to see how they playout before criticizing.

Are you replying to me or to Stroll?

[mzso]

Wow, reading something like this makes me think F1 should be renamed to Prescription 1.

It's almost like it is a formula of rules.

It's almost like blueprint, you mean.

It was a formula even when there was hardly more than a displacement limit and a weight limit for cars.

[vorticism]

However, Vettel has compared the changes to the introduction of hybrid power units in 2014, which caused skyrocketing costs for teams, but did little to increase the on-track entertainment. The intention was to attract increasingly conscious climate manufacturers, but Vettel isn’t convinced it’s worked out well.

He told Auto Motor und Sport: “It cost far too much money and did not benefit the series. Innovative solutions from the previous engine regulations are being dispensed with in order to make it less expensive.

“This is intended to attract new manufacturers. The electric component is generally good and is also needed in mobility. However, 100 percent electric mobility is already further advanced on the road due to its unbeatable efficiency.”

...

When pushed for his opinion on the sustainable fuel switch, the 38-year-old continued: “I think climate-neutral fuels are good because there is a need for them in the world outside motorsport. For the many vehicles that are already on the road. For shipping and aircraft.

“What you have to be careful about is the origin of these fuels. If you unleash the typical Formula 1 development race on them, things can quickly go in the wrong direction, as was the case in 2014. When it comes to fuels, we should close the door by limiting the origin of the molecules and establishing a certain degree of relevance for series production.”

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-auto ... on-changes

[mzso]

However, Vettel has compared the changes to the introduction of hybrid power units in 2014, which caused skyrocketing costs for teams, but did little to increase the on-track entertainment. The intention was to attract increasingly conscious climate manufacturers, but Vettel isn’t convinced it’s worked out well.

He told Auto Motor und Sport: “It cost far too much money and did not benefit the series. Innovative solutions from the previous engine regulations are being dispensed with in order to make it less expensive.

“This is intended to attract new manufacturers. The electric component is generally good and is also needed in mobility. However, 100 percent electric mobility is already further advanced on the road due to its unbeatable efficiency.”

...

When pushed for his opinion on the sustainable fuel switch, the 38-year-old continued: “I think climate-neutral fuels are good because there is a need for them in the world outside motorsport. For the many vehicles that are already on the road. For shipping and aircraft.

“What you have to be careful about is the origin of these fuels. If you unleash the typical Formula 1 development race on them, things can quickly go in the wrong direction, as was the case in 2014. When it comes to fuels, we should close the door by limiting the origin of the molecules and establishing a certain degree of relevance for series production.”

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-auto ... on-changes

I still don't get what they could poor so much money into. It's two friggin motors on shafts, a turbo, and a bit of battery storage. Of which they already had batteries and one of the motors.

All the talk of sustainable fuel is funny. It's completely irrelevant technologically. Engines that run on them would run fine on conventional fuel. Meaningless PR.

("increasingly conscious climate manufacturers" - journalism at its best...)

[lucafo]

Hi guys.
Good morning!
I am not familiar with Indy series and do not know details about their power unit.
I notice that there is some electrification!
During Indianapolis 500, at classification, I saw nobody doing recharging - actually they use to use all the battery at the last lap.
But, during racing, I saw recharging at the corners even thow the telemetry showing they queeping full throtle!
Maybe F1, next year, could try to find some "tricky" (maybe using some part of the inicial braking) to recharge at full throtle at some curves that do not demand full power.
Just a guess!!!
Best regards to all!

[gruntguru]

. . . But, during racing, I saw recharging at the corners even thow the telemetry showing they queeping full throtle! . . .

Do you know whether the telemetry was showing engine throttle position or driver pedal position?

It is possible the driver was requesting say 60% power and the control system was running the engine at 100% while subtracting power for charging.

[lucafo]

. . . But, during racing, I saw recharging at the corners even thow the telemetry showing they queeping full throtle! . . .

Do you know whether the telemetry was showing engine throttle position or driver pedal position?

It is possible the driver was requesting say 60% power and the control system was running the engine at 100% while subtracting power for charging.

Good point!
Don't how it works.
And, maybe, it won't work for F1...

[deadhead]

Hi guys.
Good morning!
I am not familiar with Indy series and do not know details about their power unit.
I notice that there is some electrification!
During Indianapolis 500, at classification, I saw nobody doing recharging - actually they use to use all the battery at the last lap.
But, during racing, I saw recharging at the corners even thow the telemetry showing they queeping full throtle!
Maybe F1, next year, could try to find some "tricky" (maybe using some part of the inicial braking) to recharge at full throtle at some curves that do not demand full power.
Just a guess!!!
Best regards to all!

Wouldn’t that increase fuel consumption?

This is going to be fascinating