Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[SameSame]

All the talk about performance is always about the MGU-H, TC or ICE; what about the Control Electronics, MGU-K and Energy Store? Is there just not a lot of scope of development for these items and is Honda on par with the rest in this department?

[godlameroso]

All the talk about performance is always about the MGU-H, TC or ICE; what about the Control Electronics, MGU-K and Energy Store? Is there just not a lot of scope of development for these items and is Honda on par with the rest in this department?

Aside from making it more compact there's not much you can do to improve the mguk. There is some scope to improve the inverters, and some control electronics, a lot of it is also down to software. As for the batteries, sure but progress is dictated by industry, the teams don't make the batteries. More compact and energy dense battery back with higher charge and discharge rates are always nice. But progress is essentialy bi- yearly as opposed to a few weeks, or months for engine upgrades.

[SameSame]

All the talk about performance is always about the MGU-H, TC or ICE; what about the Control Electronics, MGU-K and Energy Store? Is there just not a lot of scope of development for these items and is Honda on par with the rest in this department?

Aside from making it more compact there's not much you can do to improve the mguk. There is some scope to improve the inverters, and some control electronics, a lot of it is also down to software. As for the batteries, sure but progress is dictated by industry, the teams don't make the batteries. More compact and energy dense battery back with higher charge and discharge rates are always nice. But progress is essentialy bi- yearly as opposed to a few weeks, or months for engine upgrades.

Thanks! Do you think they use PLC's for the controllers? Or will a normal microcontroller be stable enough?

[godlameroso]

I've seen it mentioned a few times Mercedes definitely uses PLC. I don't know about the others.

[gruntguru]

Yes.

NL_Fer was referring to a part load condition.

Me too. Even running the ICE at full load, the MGUK can reduce the output by up to 120 kW for a net output of less than 500 kW.

For even lighter loads, there will be ICE operating points with near peak TE but much lower output. Imagine say:
- 8,000 rpm
- WOT (to reduce pumping losses)
- 25:1 AFR
- 60 kg/hr fuel flow

ICE output would be less than 450 kW, minus 120 to the MGUK (all MGUH output going to the ES) leaving less than 330 kW to the wheels, but very high TE and lots of energy (say 160 kW) to the ES.

[amho]

Hasegawa's interview with Auto motor und sport:

The McLaren are in the top-speed table mostly behind.
Is there only the engine fault, or the car has too much air resistance?
Hasegawa: Both. The car has more downforce this year. And our motor has too little power. Even if McLaren would take the same wing setting like the other teams, we would be in top speed and not forward.

Renault believes that they lie on the motor based half a second behind Mercedes.
How far Honda's gone?
Hasegawa: On the racetrack, we are about 1.5 seconds behind Mercedes. This gap we can not close only to the engine safely. I join Renault's opinion and would say that pure half a second from a performance point. But if this half a second coming, McLaren may also react with the vehicle concept, and the tires are lighter in their work area. The one helps then the other.

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... edit-text=

[Brian Coat]

Yes.

NL_Fer was referring to a part load condition.

Me too. Even running the ICE at full load, the MGUK can reduce the output by up to 120 kW for a net output of less than 500 kW.

For even lighter loads, there will be ICE operating points with near peak TE but much lower output. Imagine say:
- 8,000 rpm
- WOT (to reduce pumping losses)
- 25:1 AFR
- 60 kg/hr fuel flow

ICE output would be less than 450 kW, minus 120 to the MGUK (all MGUH output going to the ES) leaving less than 330 kW to the wheels, but very high TE and lots of energy (say 160 kW) to the ES.

Apols. I did not follow your meaning.

I agree.

And I'm thinking that below a certain part load this won't work and you have to throttle the engine and consider aggressive strategies like rich+retard to get heat to MGU-H?

[PlatinumZealot]

I've seen it mentioned a few times Mercedes definitely uses PLC. I don't know about the others.

No they dont use PLC's they use engine management units just like regular street cars.
A PLC is a different kind of computer for different kind of purpose. A PLC is a very general type of computer used mainly in industrial automation. You will have a very tough time adapting it to run an engine. Better to use an ECU. More compact.. Faster processing and it is custom for your application.

I have seen many a PLC need a custom daughter board to work in high speed applications. PLC's belong in cabinets. ECU's belong in cars.

[gruntguru]

Yes.

NL_Fer was referring to a part load condition.

Me too. Even running the ICE at full load, the MGUK can reduce the output by up to 120 kW for a net output of less than 500 kW.

For even lighter loads, there will be ICE operating points with near peak TE but much lower output. Imagine say:
- 8,000 rpm
- WOT (to reduce pumping losses)
- 25:1 AFR
- 60 kg/hr fuel flow

ICE output would be less than 450 kW, minus 120 to the MGUK (all MGUH output going to the ES) leaving less than 330 kW to the wheels, but very high TE and lots of energy (say 160 kW) to the ES.

Apols. I did not follow your meaning.

I agree.

And I'm thinking that below a certain part load this won't work and you have to throttle the engine and consider aggressive strategies like rich+retard to get heat to MGU-H?

The next step is probably cylinder deactivation. This allows full blowdown energy capture from active cylinder firings. Some Daq screenshots posted here suggest biased operating points for L/R banks which would also be a part load strategy.

At still lighter loads, I don't think heat to the turbine (MGUH) is important. If more compressor power is needed, it is more efficient to harness the fuel energy in the ICE, generate with the MGUK, then drive the compressor with the MGUH.

[Brian Coat]

GG: I think you are right.

Deac+enleanment will extend the 'load turndown' range of efficient ICE running.

I had assumed that under certain conditions the need to maximise MGU-H output and a low engine output demand would combine to suggest a more aggressive strategy but it sounds like this could well be wrong.

[livinglikethathuh]

I thought (and read somewhere) that the part throttle "trrrrrrrrr" sound in pre-season testing was due to cylinder deactivation. I am, however, skeptical on the efficiency of cylinder deactivation; I suppose the idling engine is not producing more than what the MGU-K can absorb(120 kW)? Or maybe, the engine could switch to a map that creates more exhaust energy for MGU-H capture.

Not worth it IMO to pump the deactivated cylinders and not producing energy with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sasha]

From HRD boss.

2 years away from winning.

This year will only be luck if on the podium,goal is points every race.

Next year goal is some podiums but always in the fight for podiums.

[diffuser]

I know, but some days/weeks ago they said they´re focused 50/50 on 2016/2017 projects. If that 50% of 2016 project is also focused on improvements wich can be used in 2017 then that would make sense, otherwise...

Yeah, I take all that with a grain of salt. It's obvious to me they know they can only get so much done in 2016 and 2017 takes a priority. They're not gonna leave 2017 project with any lack of resources. I'd presume 2016 gets whatever 2017 can't use. They're not gonna come out and tell us they've given up on 2016.

[gruntguru]

I thought (and read somewhere) that the part throttle "trrrrrrrrr" sound in pre-season testing was due to cylinder deactivation. I am, however, skeptical on the efficiency of cylinder deactivation; I suppose the idling engine is not producing more than what the MGU-K can absorb(120 kW)? Or maybe, the engine could switch to a map that creates more exhaust energy for MGU-H capture.

Not worth it IMO to pump the deactivated cylinders and not producing energy with them.

Running 6 part loaded cylinders using throttling involves significant pumping losses as well as reduced combustion efficiency from reduced peak temperatures/pressures. If the engine could be run at WOT with 3 cylinders deactivated, the fuel usage is halved, the indicated power is halved and the brake power is approximately (max-brake-power) minus (max-indicated-power/2).

If you prefer the deactivated cylinders to be throttled, it could be done (for 3 cylinders only) by throttling and deactivating one bank. This strategy would likely result in increased pumping losses however.

[livinglikethathuh]

Yeah, that makes sense. Why I think this is inefficient is that Honda is (to my knowledge) the only team that uses cylinder deactivation. Wouldn't other teams use this if they had no better use for the cylinders?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk