2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[gruntguru]

Just saying, the current fixed length setup is optimised for a particular rpm. A variable setup will not offer any improvement at that rpm. If it happens to be max power rpm, the variable setup will not increase the peak power.

[J.A.W.]

So, since F1 is not like some motorsports.. such as aircraft/boat or snowmobile racing that utilize effective CVT..
..to remain very closely in the 'golden' zone that is peak torque-to-peak horsepower rpm..
.. some significantly practicable benefit..
..as a recent previous poster has confidently predicted..
..is indeed very probable..

[gruntguru]

Back to my initial thoughts which are.

- The practical benefits will be at rpm somewhat removed from the tuned-length optimum.
- The benefit of perhaps +5% VE does not translate to +5% torque because the engine cannot use (burn) the extra air.

So not significant.

Maybe for enhancement of efficiency (and therefore power) in some lower rpm range (<10,500) ie when running for fuel saving not power. I suspect the current trumpet length is set for rpm a little lower than the power peak in which case a variable system would also provide some increase in peak power.

[J.A.W.]

G-G.. ..the point of the variable length inlet is to attempt to optimise flow over a wider rpm range..

WOT or not, & a fixed trumpet must be a compromise by comparison..

What I'd like to know is..
..is the shape/area/vortex generation potential of the intake 'trumpet' also open, as well as 'variable length'?

[Tim.Wright]

So, since F1 is not like some motorsports.. such as aircraft/boat or snowmobile racing that utilize effective CVT..
..to remain very closely in the 'golden' zone that is peak torque-to-peak horsepower rpm..
.. some significantly practicable benefit..
..as a recent previous poster has confidently predicted..
..is indeed very probable..

At the risk of starting another torque/power debate...

I think a better definition of the "golden zone" would be the band which maximises the area under the speed-power curve. This would likely start somewhat under the peak power and finish somewhat above it. There's no reason why the peak torque RPM is of any significance once you move out of the traction limited region since your goal is to always maximise your tractive energy

[henry]

Will tuned inlets reduce the load on the compressor? If so I guess that should increase the amount of electrical energy available and so improve lap time without necessarily increasing peak power.

[J.A.W.]

At the risk of starting another torque/power debate...

I think a better definition of the "golden zone" would be the band which maximises the area under the speed-power curve. This would likely start somewhat under the peak power and finish somewhat above it. There's no reason why the peak torque RPM is of any significance once you move out of the traction limited region since your goal is to always maximise your tractive energy

Yeah Tim, as pointed out by henry (stat above), the current F1 mill has mysterious ways of spreading its effort around,
however - since the efficiency factor of the allowable fuel flow is crux,
-then minimising collateral obstacles to optimum airflow has got to be worthwhile..

[Tim.Wright]

I was only referring specifically to the comment about the golden zone or optimum working range of the engine being between peak torque and peak power which is not true if your goal is to maximise acceleration performance.

[toraabe]

Will tuned inlets reduce the load on the compressor? If so I guess that should increase the amount of electrical energy available and so improve lap time without necessarily increasing peak power.

I don't think so, but you will probably get a slightly improvement of cylinder filling, due to the velocity inside the pipes. In this video you can hear the MGU-H spins up the turbo when David Coulthard is trying the 2014 Williams mercedes. at 0.40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD3TbS86Kh8

[ian_s]

Will tuned inlets reduce the load on the compressor? If so I guess that should increase the amount of electrical energy available and so improve lap time without necessarily increasing peak power.

I don't think so, but you will probably get a slightly improvement of cylinder filling, due to the velocity inside the pipes. In this video you can hear the MGU-H spins up the turbo when David Coulthard is trying the 2014 Williams mercedes. at 0.40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD3TbS86Kh8

as cylinder filling isnt really a problem as there's no boost limit, surely any improvement in cylinder filling will lead to lower demands for boost, therefore less load on the compressor?

[J.A.W.]

Yes, the interrelated nature of the compound engine's power units means that synergistic properties must be
factored into overall driving performance effect, & it makes the old school turbo-boost era seem crude indeed..

[Pieoter]

Would they still get a gain from resonance optimisation with variable trumpets?

You would want to keep the boost to a minimum since more boost would lead to higher temperatures.

My thinking anyway

[gruntguru]

Yes everybody, the gain will come from reducing the boost in rpm ranges where the variable system is superior. Remember, it is not superior everywhere. There will be one or two narrow rpm bands where the fixed trumpet is the right length and the variable system offers no gain.

Yes, maximising performance requires maximising the height and width of the peak power area - peak torque has nothing to do with it. OTOH best thermal efficiency will occur somewhere lower in the rev range, possibly below 10,500 rpm which means at reduced power. This operating point may be ripe for intake wave optimisation and use for "fuel saving" mode.

[OO7]

A man who definitely knows told me that Merc have been working on variable inlet trumpets since mid-2014 and will be running them.

I hope that you are true to your name.

[J.A.W.]

Yes everybody, the gain will come from reducing the boost in rpm ranges where the variable system is superior. Remember, it is not superior everywhere. There will be one or two narrow rpm bands where the fixed trumpet is the right length and the variable system offers no gain.

Yes, maximising performance requires maximising the height and width of the peak power area - peak torque has nothing to do with it. OTOH best thermal efficiency will occur somewhere lower in the rev range, possibly below 10,500 rpm which means at reduced power. This operating point may be ripe for intake wave optimisation and use for "fuel saving" mode.

What I would like to see, is clarification of the inlet 'trumpet' dimensional parameters re variability..

Is the adaptive feature allowable solely a matter of length, or is a more complex set up permitted?

( Boundary layer feeds/pressure air bleeds/vortex vanes/laminar flow moderators/temperature control ducting)..

If multi-adjustable, then presumably, it can match the current system at its fixed best functional zone,
& better it - everywhere else.. ..even if the fractional efficiency increase is small, improvement is good..