trinidefender wrote: .... I think I have found a way that engine builders can increase the efficiency of F1 engines at part throttle ......
Now on the intake side. Since the compressor is attached to the turbine by means of a shaft then it to would be spinning at 100,000 rpm because the mgu-h is spinning the shaft. My thinking goes that on the cylinder that the intake valve is open air is being forced in. If air fills the combustion chamber 'quicker' (for want of a better word) than the piston descends in the cylinder then a situation arises where the piston is now actually adding energy to the crankshaft.
Yes, if the mgu-h was not there then the turbocharger would still have some effect on the intake side. However it would have the opposite effect on the exhaust side with an increase in back pressure. The combined effect of reduced back pressure on the piston in the exhaust phase and the increased pressure on the intake phase (raising the volumetric efficiency) should mean that less energy is taken from the crankshaft and maybe some even added in. This will have a net result of more than 50% at 10,000 engine rpm for roughly 0.5(X). More net torque at that rpm for the same fuel used.
your scheme appears to spend valuable stored electrical energy and recover pneumatically some of that spending of energy
to 'save' some fuel
surely other ways of spending electrical energy are more beneficial to race-time and track position ?
as in recent N/A F1 according to Renault Sport, little or no throttling is needed anyway (for partial powers)
and there's almost no reward for partial-power efficiency
because fuel rate limit is driven only by rpm, regardless of how much or little power is needed
ie there's plenty of fuel available at partial powers (this is no accident)
and fuel 'saved' cannot be held back eg for adding to the fuel rate at full demand
and anyway fuel can be spent to drive MGU-K generation exactly as it has been spent to drive KERS generation
the only benefit of fuel saving is a small weight reduction ie load 92 or 94 kg not 100 kg
surely it's more advantageous to spend fuel to eg keep the turbo spooled up whenever desirable
even spool it down (for generation) when appropriate, but any way and every way go for maximum energy storage and reuse ?
(at partial power you won't be MGU-H generating for real-time use)