Honda F1 project leader Yusuke Hasegawa has outlined a number of reasons why Honda has been struggling so badly in the beginning of the 2017 Formula One season. He confirmed that lots of problems were not discovered while running on the dynamo meter.
mclaren111 wrote:http://encdn.f1i.com/wp-content/uploads ... ICE_EN.jpg
Good pictures of the changes they made.
trinidefender wrote:In the first picture above, what are those carbon fibre pipes coming out the side of the plenum? They can't be part of the trumpets can they? Seems like the wrong spot....
They must be very long - especially if there is a variable length mechanism in there as well. Two thoughts:ctdrftna wrote:Absolutely looks like intake runners.
Silverstone, japanese press report summary
Friday ------------------------------------
http://f1sokuho.mopi...887&tt=-1&at=30
Hasegawa
( ) parts are "info in the article" but by the looks of it some of them can be transcription of Hasegawa quote/info. Necessary to put it otherwise the quote alone doesn't make sense
(regarding renewing Alonso's ICE) in terms of durability, it's possible to make another (5th) race, but we dont want to finish the race with the PU that's at the timing of expiring.
(the other reason for new ICE introduction here at britain being that they wanted to verify the new intake fitted with new ICE as it's impossible to fire up the used PU to verify new intake+ICE) We couldn't do it for Jenson, but we wanted to conduct the verification to ensure things at least for one PU.
It's apparent that introducing new intake will make the PU better, but we were worried if it would really function properly.
(then JB's PU suffered from some data issues) now, we'd like to check again to be ready for Saturday and beyond.
Saturday --------------------------------------------------------
http://f1sokuho.mopi...930&tt=-1&at=30
http://f1sokuho.mopi...ics_type=-1&rn=
also f1 sokuho silverstone issue (print)
Hasegawa
It's not like we compared 2 different intakes by running and comparing them on the same track at the same time, so we are not yet able to confirm precisely how much the new system has gained compared to the previous spec so far at British GP.
it was positive that we could go to q3 at this track where competitiveness of comprehensive package matters, and that we could confirm the competitiveness that we can make it to Q3 by fighting squarely against STR, Williams and Force India.
Of course we cannot say we are satisfied with this position, besides it's not like we could go through to Q3 easily. Still, even tho the Alonso's time in Q3 got eliminated, we are encouraged by the 8th fastest time.
Next, we'd like to progress to the level where we beat/surpass williams and can battle squarely with RBR, that's the target we'd like to achieve towards / by the end of the season.
Sunday -----------------------------------------------------
http://f1sokuho.mopi...982&tt=-1&at=15
http://sportiva.shue.../07/13/post_49/
also f1 sokuho silverstone issue (print)
Hasegawa
It was painful that we got stuck behind Williams. At the same time, it is also true that dry racing line was narrow/limited so that it was difficult to overtake.
I discussed with mclaren's strategist about pitstop timing, he said that you can say anything by looking at result after the race but at that moment in race it was unclear which way things would go. For sure there are some things in which we could've done better, but it's just hindsight. The engineer was also saying that we should've pitted at the same timing as Vettel regarding switching from inters to dry, but that's hindsight too I reckon. If that strategy was spot on, the car itself had enough pace to be able to score points. Not blaming strategists, just that it was regrettable that we were completely in sync with most competitors in strategy and didnt take risk aggressively to bet on one side, like Vettel who chose to gamble on changing to dry very early. Even Vettel took that much aggressive approach. Perhaps we could've taken more risk in strategy.
(on Alonso's spin) Lacking straight line speed, so he may have tried bit too hard.
It's impossible to make proper evaluation after such race like this, but no doubt we are making progress.
In terms of this time's upgrade, we are able to fight squarely against STR and FI, also we were not inferior to Williams as well. However, we are still unable to finish within point securely. So it's not satisfactory situation
We could confirm that we are making progress on technological development.
Including this time's update, I'm satisfied with the development we've made so far itself.
But it was regrettable that race didnt go smooth, unable to connect the progress to the result.
(asked 'package itself has progressed a lot from last season, this year esp progress after spain is remarkable. satisfaction or dissatisfaction/frustration, which is bigger?') Of course dissatisfaction/frustration. Because especially we are unable to have decent battle at power tracks, also we are receiving remarks from drivers that straight line speed is the issue. So, not enough/satisfactory at all.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
On GBGP token upgrade, future prospect and some retrospect ------------------------
---------------
http://f1sokuho.mopi...872&tt=-1&at=15
(already posted on the day the article released, some amendments made)
on token upgrades, Nakamura explains:
we improved intake system and increased combustion efficiency (by using 2 tokens)
Up till now, there were some areas in inlet system where airflow was not so good. Therefore we modified its layout in order to be able to send more air into the combustion chamber. Of course power has increased.
Nakamura did not tell us about how many ps/hp has been gained (seems press asked for horse power figure but Nakamura refused to give number, rightly so), but explained that the increase in output is "at least to the extent that drivers can actually feel". Besides, this time's upgrade is "merely the first step of the significant update".
We have 10 tokens remaining, so for the next step, we'd like to modify combustion chamber/system itself to achieve further output increase. in order for that, we are assessing and selecting which solution/path/combination is the most effective possible by conducting variety of dyno testings/evaluations/comparisons at the very moment.
It would be ideal if we could introduce all of the upgrades at once at the next upgrade, but there is possibility that some will slip through / not make it in time / etc. So, most likely it will be 3 phased upgrade including this time's upgrade.
in some reports, Hasegawa's quote of "if the upgrade goes well, half a second / lap gain can be expected" has been introduced/written. But Nakamura says "that must be some sort of misunderstanding".
For example if it's Monza and Spa, those tracks are highly power sensitive so 0.5sec/lap gain might not be impossible. But it's absolutely impossible at tracks like Hungary. How many ps we have to gain in order for that, i wonder. If such thing is possible, we would be able to dominate (laughs).
- Exxon Mobil is developing special fuel accommodated for the upgrade, and if things go well, the new fuel is expected to be introduced at Spa at the earliest (info in the article)
------------
http://sportiva.shue.../07/13/post_49/
Hasegawa
(on silverstone upgrade) we modified air box in order to reduce intake resistance and improve combustion efficiency. Drivers are not saying sth like "it has become better massively!", but on dyno we are seeing apparent increase in output, besides it's quite a decent amount of increase. It would've been difficult to go through to Q3 without this update, also it's encouraging that we could set 8th fastest time that's only within 0.1sec to Williams even though the time has been eliminated due to track limit infringement.
------------
http://f1sokuho.mopi...ics_type=-1&rn=
Hasegawa
(Asked about target for 2nd half of season) Regarding the development for this season, we want to be battling with Red Bull, so we'd like to progress our package to be able to beat/exceed Williams at least. We'd like to manage to achieve that with the next upgrade.
-------------
F1sokuho british gp issue (print)
Hasegawa
Despite using only two tokens, we were able to achieve relatively substantial improvement in output. In that sense, I think this update went well.
If we had been without the upgrade for British GP, we would not have been able to make it to Q3 with high probability, i reckon. Maybe this time's upgrade was worth about 0.2sec/lap gain.
- this update is 1st phase of big upgrade. Next phase will be about ICE itself, and intend to introduce targeting for Belgian GP at the earliest. (info in the article)
with the upcoming upgrades, we are expecting lap time improvement that is the level of about 0.5sec/lap to be made by the end of this season.
For instance, at the tracks where lap time is influenced heavily by power such as Spa and Monza, we'd like to bring it to that level of speed. We are estimating that achieving that target is possible with the next planned update of ICE.
===========================================
Hasegawa interview conducted at Silverstone
http://jp.motorsport...向上に使いたい-797357/
2016-07-10
------ first half of the season is over, it seems that slow but steady progress can be observed.
"For this year, we've been aiming to be able to race properly by overcoming/rectifying reliability issue we suffered a lot last season. Therefore, we've been working on how we manage to raise/maintain reliability without sacrificing performance by crushing problems one by one. Still, we retired race 3 times due to PU related issues, so still long way to go."
----- What was the reasons for the retirements?
"Actually same as last year, it's not like there is something fundamental/critical in engine itself like piston break down etc, but variety of issues keep coming up one after another, like we should've shortened the maintenance timing/cycle and exchanged components more frequently, there were some things we couldn't notice on the system check, etc etc , so we were sorting out issues as if wack a mole game."
--------- what was the toughest mole?
"You cannot know where moles would come out of, so that's the most difficult part. For instance, if it's about obvious issues like rigidity of engine block not enough, metal gets burnt etc, it's easy to address because counter measure you have to take is rather simple like lowering rpm or output. However, the problems that are occurring now is easy to rectify once you get to know it, but for something like this, you cannot know when and where it will happen, so it's difficult. It's kind of thing you have to fix by gaining experience."
--------- So it's not problem related to MGU-K and MGU-H?
"There are some as well. Last year, the original target of how much energy you get from heat recovery was too low. The amount of energy lacking due to default target being too low, besides harvesting itself was lacking as well, that was last year. This year things improved by doubling the recovery energy. But, it's not something you'd be able to do if you knew it. The main issue was that we didnt understand well about target setting."
--------- 'Not something you'd be able to do even if you knew it' means?
"Of course you'd had to be aware that target setting should've been higher, and even if you knew it, you wouldn't be able to do it right away, both."
-------- In this year's races, the running position is getting higher, so the result is following.
"I think it's crucial that we upgraded turbo at Canada. Regarding turbo, we optimized the fin. The rpm is set at 50,000 (sic) by regulation so cannot be increased higher than that. In a nutshell, we modified the shape of the fin so as to be able to convert the same exhaust energy into more kinetic/electric energy. In F1 MGU-K's max output is set at 120kW, so there's no point in harvesting 1,000kW from turbo. In that sense, I think we reached certain/decent level."
------ regarding engine, development hasnt stopped, right?
"Regarding engine, we brought the first upgrade here at Britain. We increased combustion efficiency by increasing the amount of intake air. We have not been able to use its full performance despite having potential originally. We've been working to be able to use it at its full gradually since the opening race by assessing reliability that is trade-off with performance."
"Weight can be lighter as well. Up till now, the weight has increased for the proportion of prioritizing/securing reliability, so from now on we'll be shedding weight gradually. But output itself wont increase by weight reduction, so we have to increase power by improving combustion efficiency. It's power first and foremost, so. Once achieve the power, you cut it down towards the limit. It's what we call safety factor, but even if you have safety factor of 1.0, that doesn't guarantee that it wont break down, so whether you make it 1.5 or 2.0, that's where experience matters."
------- one and half years has passed since entrance, has experience got accumulated?
"No, not enough. It takes very long time to run engine for one cycle. Under the current regulation, you cannot introduce many engines, so. Meanwhile in 00s, we were using like 20 engines per season."
-------- I heard the number of renaming token is 10. What will you be using them for?
"We'd like to use tokens for increasing power of engine itself. In order to gain output, it's combustion itself after all. We are thinking of modifying chamber shape as well. But unsure for this year. We are seeing the overall direction to go, but haven't got what's unequivocally clear yet."
------ Current power unit of f1 is extremely complicated, but what is it like for technicians?
"I think it's extraordinarily intriguing component."
----- Any influence the component has to mass-production cars?
"There's good possibility of electric turbo. Electric turbo itself is established as a technology already. However, it's not for mass production yet."
---------- In LMP1 HV category of WEC, battery has become essential factor, is it so in F1 as well?
"Of course it's one of key factors, but the amount of electricity that it can release in 1 lap is set at 4MJ. If motor output become many hundreds kW and battery capacity 10 or 20 MJ like EV, then the key subject should be how you make it as compact as possible."
-------- battery is made of lithium ion, right?
"Li-ion is the most efficient. Chemical-wise there must be better alternatives, but what's available is li-ion. With current size, it's impossible to use capacitor. KERS of around 2009 was still of 200kJ or 400KJ so capacitor and flywheel may have been viable/possible options, but current capacity of 4MJ is quite big, so."
-------- Target is Mercedes, right?
"Of course it's mercedes. System itself of power unit isn't that different I imagine. They are at high level I think. The biggest difference is engine itself. We're not obtaining much info regarding its weight, but achieving good power anyway."
------- Can you look back on your last 6 months?
"While I'm happy that we are able to show progress, it's not the level I can be satisfied with. Of course it's progressive / step-by-step thing, so we set the target at scoring points regularly for this year, but we are not yet able to score points regularly. Long way from achieving our target still. Asked whether I'd be happy if achieved the objective, no I would not be happy at all."
------- There was an article that Honda is interested in Formula E
"I think Formula E is valuable in progressing the technology, and generally speaking EV is one option of course, so if combine these factors together I think there is technological value in Formula E. I'm not denying that. However, the same applies / can be said not only to Formula E but also to pikes peak and EV race. I answered like that way/nuance, but then they wrote like 'Honda could/would/might do FE'. It's just that I'm not denying it as a general subject."
#aerogollumturbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!
I'd have thought they'd make it as compact as possible within the flow rates they want for the current application's needs.godlameroso wrote:I hope Honda engineers would take advantage of the circumstances and create an intake system that would be flexible enough to handle any type of further upgrades.
You can see the actuators. Probably just a simple linear system.gruntguru wrote:trinidefender wrote:In the first picture above, what are those carbon fibre pipes coming out the side of the plenum? They can't be part of the trumpets can they? Seems like the wrong spot....They must be very long - especially if there is a variable length mechanism in there as well. Two thoughts:ctdrftna wrote:Absolutely looks like intake runners.
- Perhaps they are wave tuning for the second wave (about 30 cm) or the first (about 60 cm). Third wave (about 20 cm) is most common.
- Perhaps they have two switchable runners of different lengths for each cylinder. (Not likely. They are more likely to have a continuously variable system for a number of reasons.)
0.5 seconds of upgrade in the engine said......GoranF1 wrote:According to Hasegawa next update is Spa or Monza.
I think hr said .5 in all updates this year.PABLOEING wrote:0.5 seconds of upgrade in the engine said......GoranF1 wrote:According to Hasegawa next update is Spa or Monza.
