Concept power units from 2030

[Tommy Cookers]

In my opinion, energy recovery during braking should be excluded from the calculation of PU efficiency.

I understand what you are saying but it’s not right imho...
If you talk purely about ICE efficiency then sure, but not engine.

it is right imho

the ICE efficiency is priceless because it is the prime mover ie its capabilities govern everything else

the PU 'efficiency' is a reflection of the properties of the vehicle use system ie the recovery on one or another track
(eg on the circle track at Bonneville salt flats the recovery will be zero)

[Tommy Cookers]

.... Brake-by-Wire (BBW) already prevented drivers from using their full sensitivity to push braking to the absolute limit, and with the new PUs, the massive energy recovery required at every braking zone will make 'on-the-edge' braking a thing of the past. ...

the MGU-K automatically backs down the PU somewhat under braking (and acceleration) if there's a sudden loss of grip

its control characteristic must have a stability margin - anything else would be unsustainable or undriveable

[TeamKoolGreen]

There's a new 2 stroke engine in town. Before I post that, I asked Google if there was ever a 2 stroke F1 car. Here's the answer.

Proposed/Concept Engines: In the 1970s, there were studies into 1.5-litre turbocharged 2-stroke engines, and Ferrari reportedly worked on a 3-cylinder 2-stroke engine concept around 1994, though it was never raced.

Modern Considerations: Around 2020, F1 management, including CTO Pat Symonds, explored the potential for high-efficiency, turbocharged 2-stroke hybrid engines to meet future sustainability goals, but these have not been adopted.

Does anyone remember that ?

Anyway, here's the new engine. It is a supercharged rotary valve 2 stroke. 2 stroke screamers would bring some sound back. Listen to it at 16:25 mins.

The prototype is 578cc with 220 hp and it weighs 50 kg

[Ferry]

Energy recovery under braking should be banned from F1.

I'd rather go the opposite way. Regenerate from the front axle too.

I appreciate super-efficient engines that strive to extract every last drop of energy from the fuel, but regenerative braking and the heavy batteries it demands simply aren't right for F1.

Give us back the mgu-h. Make it a spec part if necessary.

[.poz]

Give us back the mgu-h. Make it a spec part if necessary.

It would be enough to separate the turbine and the compressor, with the former dedicated solely to generating electricity and the latter powered by its own electric motor; the design of the MGU-H was complex because it was a series of compromises between two different functions.

[Cold Fussion]

Give us back the mgu-h. Make it a spec part if necessary.

It would be enough to separate the turbine and the compressor, with the former dedicated solely to generating electricity and the latter powered by its own electric motor; the design of the MGU-H was complex because it was a series of compromises between two different functions.

I've often wondered if there is any technical merit to having a purely electrical driven compressor.

[mzso]

Give us back the mgu-h. Make it a spec part if necessary.

It would be enough to separate the turbine and the compressor, with the former dedicated solely to generating electricity and the latter powered by its own electric motor; the design of the MGU-H was complex because it was a series of compromises between two different functions.

It would have twice the electric motor weight though.

There's a new 2 stroke engine in town. Before I post that, I asked Google if there was ever a 2 stroke F1 car. Here's the answer.

Proposed/Concept Engines: In the 1970s, there were studies into 1.5-litre turbocharged 2-stroke engines, and Ferrari reportedly worked on a 3-cylinder 2-stroke engine concept around 1994, though it was never raced.

Modern Considerations: Around 2020, F1 management, including CTO Pat Symonds, explored the potential for high-efficiency, turbocharged 2-stroke hybrid engines to meet future sustainability goals, but these have not been adopted.

Does anyone remember that ?

Anyway, here's the new engine. It is a supercharged rotary valve 2 stroke. 2 stroke screamers would bring some sound back. Listen to it at 16:25 mins.

The prototype is 578cc with 220 hp and it weighs 50 kg

So new it doesn't exist for any application. Only as an experiment.

[DenBommer]

Of course, we first have to wait and see what these new cars will actually deliver during the races.

However, I think that if we continue along the same path with the next regulation change, it seems very likely that we will at least get a front axle generator. In my opinion, that would then open the door to AWD.

So I was wondering what you think about this idea:

The driver could send energy to the front wheels on demand. I was thinking of a “DAS-like” system for activation and deactivation.

[Tommy Cookers]

... the next regulation change ... In my opinion, that would then open the door to AWD.
So I was wondering what you think ....

on these occasions I wonder ....
if you have noticed our MG etc of working via continuous manipulation of an 8 speed gearbox

so what arrangement do you propose for your AWD ?

[DenBommer]

... the next regulation change ... In my opinion, that would then open the door to AWD.
So I was wondering what you think ....

on these occasions I wonder ....
if you have noticed our MG etc of working via continuous manipulation of an 8 speed gearbox

so what arrangement do you propose for your AWD ?

An ICE with an MGU-K on the crankshaft, as is currently the case.

And then an electric motor on the front axle, with drive shafts to the wheels to power the front wheel (like formule E)

That said, it might be better to stick to just a front generator, as that could still save weight on cooling and related systems.

[gearboxtrouble]

Personal preference is for more freedom when it comes to configurations and designs. They could mandate a single or twin turbo 2.0-2.5L ICE of any cylinder count and a crank located spec MGU-K of 200 hp and a manufacturer provided smaller battery (solid state allowed) only 30% of the current size that can be charged via braking on both axles (spec front axle generator only) and on throttle harvesting. Fully sustainable fuels with a defined corridor for energy density 30% higher than 26 capped at 80 kg per race. Aim for cars ~50kg lighter than now and an even smaller footprint.

[DenBommer]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/easy ... ompletely/

Is the journalist correct in his article regarding front axle recovery, or can that be solved nowadays?

[gruntguru]

Provided the front-rear effective braking bias doesn't alter dynamically you do not have electronic stability control. The driver currently has the ability to set brake bias and the front-harvesting rules could easily mandate a fixed brake bias - altered only by the driver as required.

[bananapeel23]

Energy recovery under braking should be banned from F1.

Brake-by-Wire (BBW) already prevented drivers from using their full sensitivity to the limit.

I appreciate super-efficient engines that strive to extract every last drop of energy from the fuel, but regenerative braking and the heavy batteries it demands simply aren't right for F1.

I mean I understand where you’re coming from, but I disagree. The MGU-H is to me the best energy recovery device ever used in F1. Sure, it was expensive and overcomplicatdd, but it weighed in at like 4kg and harvested absurd amounts of energy compared to the tiny weight penalty, at no cost to the drivers. It was easily worth the weight and any concept for the fastest possible car should include it.

Still, there is no way to deploy from an MGU-H (except in an anti-lag capacity) without also having an MGU-K. If you have an MGU-K for deployment, you might aswell use it to regenerate energy as well. At that point you need a battery, even if it’s just a small one that lasts for 2-3 seconds to deploy everything you harvested after heavy braking.

Realistically any modern F1 car should have an electrical component, and in my opinion they might aswell just go all out with an MGU-H, MGU-K and throw in front axle harvesting as well to make them even more efficient. It might come at a weight penalty, but as long as that weight penalty results in lower laptimes, it doesn’t matter. Not to mention the fact that MGU-K torque makes cars snappy and restores that sense of speed associated with light cars. Realistically elevtrical components also save a ton of fuel, so they cancel out a lot of the weight, at least under race conditions.

BBW has not stopped rewarding late braking, drivers like Leclerc and Hamilton are known for it and are the current best and most decorated quali drivers ever, respectively. That is despite BBW.

If you want good braking pedal feel with an MGU-K, that is up to the teams to figure out, which they will inevitably do. ABS is also an option. If LiCo is a concern you can always ban off-throttle regen without a certain % of brake pressure applied.

[Tommy Cookers]

if ABS (and TC?) are allowable then these are available (and likely exist ?) right now
on rear axle only o/c

front axle MGU-K (or regen only) has a big drawback ....
there is no gearbox ... so ....
the MG & CE & ERS are run at high torque (current)/low rpm (voltage) and low torque (current)/high rpm (voltage)
this reduces efficiency in numerous ways
(as shown by the present developments ie the dominance of high rpm generation)

so mechanical/hybrid 4wd is probably better ....
(though mechanical/hybrid rear wd and electric front wd would not prevent front wheel torque vectoring &TC)
or petrol/electric configuration ie ICE as 'range extender'


even the existing capacity of the ERS relative to the ICE's cannot be ignored (in 'driver aid' terms)