Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[PlatinumZealot]

No one has 100% deployment yet. Not even mercedes. Far from it.

Maybe it didn't come accross clear, but I meant I meant MGUH performance with respect to Mercedes.

[Brian Coat]

J & PZ: Thanks.

"No one has 100% deployment" - Hasegawa remarks in the same article that their ability to run full K deployment whenever needed "depends on the circuit."

RET asserts "Andy Cowell has admitted " 100% K and ~90 kW. Maybe.

Would anyone entertain the idea that Merc could have ~90 kW and can supply 100% of K requirement *plus* some quali mode deployment (e.g. 'electric supercharger') in the race?

I have no firm data to say this is the case so I am not asserting it as fact; but I'm also struggling to find data to show it isn't possible?

[godlameroso]

I've been saying that for a while now. Theoretically there's around ~160kW limit in how much net energy you can realistically extract from the exhaust. 90kW is a lot, and if it's true it explains a lot, because then you're only asking 30kW from the battery at any given time for maximum output. You would have no problem deploying 30kW from the battery for over a minute per lap, furthermore that energy doesn't count against your 4MJ total as it's bypassing the ES. This year Honda went the route of improving deployment and maximizing the electrical side, they even went as far as sacrificing some ICE power to get it, and they made a big step forward because of it.

Next year they take the lessons of the past two years, they'll improve both engine power and electrical generation massively with the freedom to re-arrange the layout and various upgrades that were not able to be introduced this year. Next year they'll have a big step forward, they're not at the iterative stage yet like the other manufacturers. That should be their goal to start the season next year, to have a power unit that is worth re-iterating.

[godlameroso]

Any takers as to what can be improved in the block to take advantage of faster combustion? Increasing piston dwell, modifying valve timing, increasing valve intake lift and duration, who knows what kind of valve seat and port trickery they're up to.

Maybe those things aren't as important as improving the shape of the CC, and better injectors to take advantage of the CVCC concept(new spray pattern, new pre-chamber design)? Strengthening the block to withstand more detonation from the high boost pressures?

Maybe redesign coolant passages in the block casting to reduce wall quench seeing as how combustion temperatures are lower.

New cylinder and piston coatings? Maybe modifications to fuel delivery? Better fuel heater, other things?

[Wazari]

Well, the season is over. I have mixed feelings about posting in this forum but since many of you have requested that I post my thoughts about the past season I feel I owe it to some. I can write pages about this year's car but I will try and summarize my opinions about the MP4-31 and the PU. Now that the season has ended, I believe I can speak a little more loosely. I can not give exact figures and please no questions about next year's PU. With regards to next year's PU, I really can't add to what has "officially" been said. I will say that initial testing is going better than my own expectations. Also moderators, please feel free to move areas of this post if you feel it necessary to do so. The following are strictly my thoughts.

This year's PU biggest handicap was not peak power but fuel efficiency. I was extremely disappointed that certain upgrades to the combustion process could not implemented this year. The token system really handcuffing what we wanted change. Each major component of this PU has a domino effect on another. To fully implement all the desired changes was not possible this season. The compressor IMO was the biggest Achilles and the ICE had to run at a higher RPM range than desired to make this combination have the desired output to the MGU-H thus in turn having even more of a negative on fuel efficiency. I think many would be surprised at the actual peak power gaps between all four PU's.

This year has been a tremendous learning experience for me. I have a much better understanding of the desired balance needed to operate these PU's at peak efficiency and power. It's a balancing act that obviously Mercedes has done an impressive job with. Next year will be difficult with a new set of restrictions. However I feel very optimistic about next year's PU due to the experience gained over the last two seasons. I will give my thoughts to the MP4-31 chassis in the hardware section.

[mrluke]

Always fascinating to hear your insight aand I thank you for sharing it with us.

I think many would be surprised at the actual peak power gaps between all four PU's.

With the above statement are you suggesting that on peak power there is a large gap between the PUs or a small one?

[PhillipM]

Smaller than most report I'd go with. Average power over a race might in the regions of 50-100bhp between engines but the differences in peak power have been like a game of Chinese Whispers for the past 2 years.

[godlameroso]

Maybe the difference isn't that great, the big difference as he stated is how long you can have the engine at full power.


Much like the Audi LMP1 and Peugeot diesel engines were destroying the petrol engines because although peak power was similar, the power band was hugely in favor of the diesel power plants.

[GoranF1]

Keke Rosberg said yesterday Mercedes has 50hp advantage to closest rival.

[Wazari]

Keke Rosberg said yesterday Mercedes has 50hp advantage to closest rival.

Maybe at the start of the season.........................

[r101]

Keke Rosberg said yesterday Mercedes has 50hp advantage to closest rival.

Maybe at the start of the season.........................

Or in the qualification mode?

[Pierce89]

Maybe the difference isn't that great, the big difference as he stated is how long you can have the engine at full power.


Much like the Audi LMP1 and Peugeot diesel engines were destroying the petrol engines because although peak power was similar, the power band was hugely in favor of the diesel power plants.

The peak power wasnt similar. The diesels had more displacement more boost and a 15% bigger restrictor(at the beginning). You are right about tye diesels making near max power for a much larger percentage of the rev range.

[Thunder]

Thanks for posting this Wazari. Theat about sums up what i've gathered from the various Interviews with Mr. Hasegawa. The one constant was Fuel Efficiency. Max Power means nothing if you can't use it.

Also great to see the 2017 PU is overachieving. =D> =D>

[rscsr]

Maybe the difference isn't that great, the big difference as he stated is how long you can have the engine at full power.


Much like the Audi LMP1 and Peugeot diesel engines were destroying the petrol engines because although peak power was similar, the power band was hugely in favor of the diesel power plants.

The peak power wasnt similar. The diesels had more displacement more boost and a 15% bigger restrictor(at the beginning). You are right about tye diesels making near max power for a much larger percentage of the rev range.

But the Diesels have an inherent rpm limit. I think they once said they just can't rev higher than 7000rpm or so due to the long burning time they had. Even with 3000+ bar injection pressure.

[Joseki]

So, if I understand correctly what Wazari posted and what I read speculated from various source here Honda is focusing on 3 aspect for the 2017 PU:
- Implementing this CVCC/TJI combustion technology into their V6 turbo.
- Having both the V6 and the ERS system working simultaneously in the correct operational window.
- Different layout to free space for the modifications needed and lower the CoG.

If everything goes according to plans (or better) Honda will supply McLaren with a much more powerful, reliable and "lighter" PU next year.

Personally I'm really excited for next year, I've already booked a fly to Barcelona for the first test day.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 3 utilizzando Tapatalk