2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[rscsr]

I got some information of a ballpark figure for total power output.
In the latest Race Engine Technology it has been reported that both Renault and Ferrari are estimating the Mercedes PU to output about the same as last year. So to speak about 775bhp in Qualymode and that the main advantage lies in a better ICE design.

[gruntguru]

Of course the ICE in both cases is a diesel which means the AFR can be chosen to maximise efficiency since detonation and flame propagation are unaffected by mixture. What it does tell us however is that somewhere around 1.5 is the place to aim for best efficiency provided detonation and flame propagation can be effectively controlled (by optimising DI etc).

While I do personally believe that current F1 engines run slightly lean of lambda (~1.2), there are a few problems with your post. Firstly it is a diesel piston engine. Diesels never run close to stoichiometric in piston engines because it is very hard to achieve complete combustion with compression ignition.

That doesn't contradict the reasoning in the above paragraph I have requoted. The primary motivation for not running the Nomad and the Garrett model even leaner would be the reduction in power/weight ratio.

Combustion stability and ability of achieving complete combustion improvements in recent developments of diesel engines is the reason why modern diesels are getting closer to stoichiometric and making more power.

"more power" per unit displacement but not "more power" for a given fuel flow so not "more power" in the fuel-restricted F1 sense.

OTOH a higher pressure ratio in the turbomachinery is clearly a benefit to TE so I suspect the mixture chosen will be the leanest value that allows efficient heat release.

The napier nomad also used a system that used excess air and burned it in a separate combustion chamber before flowing through a turbine that powered the compressor and crankshaft.

Of course that would murder the efficiency and would only be used for emergency or take-off power.

[J.A.W.]

If of interest..
.. this period (60yo) 'Flight' article - by Bill Gunston - per Napier Nomad is data rich.. ..inc efficiency tables/graphs..

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... 01222.html

[gruntguru]

Definitely. Thanks J.A.W.

[J.A.W.]

Another NASA study - comparing efficiencies of ICE types for optimum general aviation functions..
http://www.ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c ... 011788.pdf

[irsq4]

Any infos on crankshaft arangement for current V6? Is it 3 cyl type 120 deg, or 120 with offset 15 degs with even firing

[djos]

After watching monza qually it got me thinking, is it possible that the Merc ICE is the only one using cold blowing to keep the turbo spooled up and generating continuous MGU-H power supplied to the MGU-K?

It would be pretty stupid of course if no one else was doing this but it would mean you would almost never need to waste ERS power keeping the turbo spooled?

[djos]

Following on from the above postulation; is it possible that cold blowing is what makes the oversize turbine work? If my little theory is correct then the only times within the rules the MGU-H isn't transmitting full power to the MGU-K is off throttle (or part throttle), in which case both the MGU's will be charging up the energy store ready for more acceleration.

It's likely much more complex than this in reality but I wonder if the theory is sound. Thoughts?

Edit: it's most likely obvious why I haven't postulated hot blowing as an option.

[langwadt]

Following on from the above postulation; is it possible that cold blowing is what makes the oversize turbine work? If my little theory is correct then the only times within the rules the MGU-H isn't transmitting full power to the MGU-K is off throttle (or part throttle), in which case both the MGU's will be charging up the energy store ready for more acceleration.

It's likely much more complex than this in reality but I wonder if the theory is sound. Thoughts?

Edit: it's most likely obvious why I haven't postulated hot blowing as an option.

the power to pump air comes from the crankshaft, putting it back to the crankshaft via the mgu-k wouldn't make sense.

charging the ES from both the mgu-k and the mgu-h via engine braking cold blow might be possible

[djos]

the power to pump air comes from the crankshaft, putting it back to the crankshaft via the mgu-k wouldn't make sense.

charging the ES from both the mgu-k and the mgu-h via engine braking cold blow might be possible

For sure, I'm not suggesting they would cold blow on throttle, mainly off or part throttle to keep the turbo spooled without wasting power from the energy store.

[Holm86]

Following on from the above postulation; is it possible that cold blowing is what makes the oversize turbine work? If my little theory is correct then the only times within the rules the MGU-H isn't transmitting full power to the MGU-K is off throttle (or part throttle), in which case both the MGU's will be charging up the energy store ready for more acceleration.

It's likely much more complex than this in reality but I wonder if the theory is sound. Thoughts?

Edit: it's most likely obvious why I haven't postulated hot blowing as an option.

I've suggested that cold blowing would be a big advantage on these new turbo engines almost a year ago.

Take a look here

[djos]

I've suggested that cold blowing would be a big advantage on these new turbo engines almost a year ago.

Take a look here

Oh good, I'm not crazy then!

[FW17]

Looks like all 3 manufacturers (including merc) are in agreement to lift the engine freeze while speaking to the media.

Wonder if it will translate to regulation change when they sit across the table.

[Vary]

Hey Guys, i'm a little bit confused about power output Of this engines (mainly after reading engineer benzing's blog), which to me seems incompatible with the fuel flow limit. I've done some calculations to obtain the efficiency Of the ICE, starting form a power output Of 750 hp, for the sole thermal combustion engine (like i've read here and on benzing's blog). With a LHV Of 45 MJ/kg and the fuel mass flow limit Of 100 kg/h i've obtained a fuel power equal to 1,25 MW, and so the efficiency Of 44,1%!! That's really impressive,especially if you consider the theoretical cycle efficiency (assuming a very high compression ratio Of 15:1) is 51,8%!!
What do you think about it?

[gruntguru]

If you browse the last 20 pages or so in this thread, you will find a lot of discussion of that issue.

1. 15:1 Otto cycle has Thermal Efficiency of 66% so I am not sure what cycle you have assumed.
2. F1 engines are Otto cyle plus exhaust turbocompounding.
3. MB have publicly claimed TE > 40%.
4. Top speeds for the cars are consistent with power well over 700 hp.
5. A number of researchers are claiming TE > 40% for SI engines in the lab.