Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[JuanjoTS]

What mechanism would activate the valves? Pushrods?

The traditional camshaft-pushing system resets them into the required position.

por etusch » 09 de mayo de 2017, 18:55

Parece inteligente en la primera vista, pero no estoy seguro si funciona.
En el otro lado, en su diseño, la válvula de escape debe ser su lugar habitual. válvula de admisión debe ser muy pequeño y también puede causar mayor cámara de pre. Cuando la válvula de admisión abierta no debe tocar enchufe y / o inyector chispa. Puede ser una válvula de admisión para cámara de pre y otra que es más grande que la válvula de admisión normal puede ser su lugar habitual.
Última edición por etusch 09 de mayo de 2017, 23:08, editado 1 vez en total.

It's just a rough idea, the biggest problem I find is placing 2.5 cm diameter valves in a 1cm3 or 1'5cm3 mini combustion chamber ....

[JuanjoTS]

it's interesting to me that Wazari asks here the question that I asked 5 years ago - why not design around systematically higher rpm ?

eg I suggested that 13000-14800 rpm had some advantages over 10500-12100
mainly 'boost' pressure would be lower ie the supercharging power reduced in greater proportion (eg 23000 would be NA)
the recoverable energy is at least the same at this lower boost
and much less ES energy is used in 'spooling up'

ok at that time I was assuming a mildly lean AFR not very lean
clearly if the very lean TJI or similar suffers at these higher rpm then higher rpm is not on

Parasitic losses from friction are always going to be higher the faster the ICE spins, although I suppose those losses might be smaller in F1 than I expect because of the types of finish used, which reduce friction to a degree unseen in "normal" engines. If the new little Honda ICE has very little internal friction in use, then perhaps that friction concern becomes a lower order than something else.

I'm trying to work out a reason why you would want more PU cycles for the same distance travelled.
Is it easier to run the engine on the absolute limit of knock if you have a larger number of smaller ignition events? Probably.

If the fuel rate remains the same, increasing the amount pm I would of thought would require a leaner a/f ratio and the extra air being pulled into the engine and blown out I would imagine would help spin the turbine faster.

Do others agree?

We lack a lot of data to analyze this, how much exact power does Mercedes have for each cycle of explosion and with what exact mix? Just to list 2 basic aspects.

[gruntguru]

it's interesting to me that Wazari asks here the question that I asked 5 years ago - why not design around systematically higher rpm ?

eg I suggested that 13000-14800 rpm had some advantages over 10500-12100
mainly 'boost' pressure would be lower ie the supercharging power reduced in greater proportion (eg 23000 would be NA)
the recoverable energy is at least the same at this lower boost
and much less ES energy is used in 'spooling up'

ok at that time I was assuming a mildly lean AFR not very lean
clearly if the very lean TJI or similar suffers at these higher rpm then higher rpm is not on

Parasitic losses from friction are always going to be higher the faster the ICE spins, although I suppose those losses might be smaller in F1 than I expect because of the types of finish used, which reduce friction to a degree unseen in "normal" engines. If the new little Honda ICE has very little internal friction in use, then perhaps that friction concern becomes a lower order than something else.

I'm trying to work out a reason why you would want more PU cycles for the same distance travelled.
Is it easier to run the engine on the absolute limit of knock if you have a larger number of smaller ignition events? Probably.

If the fuel rate remains the same, increasing the amount pm I would of thought would require a leaner a/f ratio and the extra air being pulled into the engine and blown out I would imagine would help spin the turbine faster.

Do others agree?

They vary the boost to give the ideal AFR at each rpm. If the AFR is const the airflow will be constant. Running leaner to increase airflow increases turbine power but compressor power required increases by a similar amount so there is no benefit. Calcs were posted in the 1.6 V6 thread a year or two back.

[Wil992]

What mechanism would activate the valves? Pushrods?

The traditional camshaft-pushing system resets them into the required position.

por etusch » 09 de mayo de 2017, 18:55

Parece inteligente en la primera vista, pero no estoy seguro si funciona.
En el otro lado, en su diseño, la válvula de escape debe ser su lugar habitual. válvula de admisión debe ser muy pequeño y también puede causar mayor cámara de pre. Cuando la válvula de admisión abierta no debe tocar enchufe y / o inyector chispa. Puede ser una válvula de admisión para cámara de pre y otra que es más grande que la válvula de admisión normal puede ser su lugar habitual.
Última edición por etusch 09 de mayo de 2017, 23:08, editado 1 vez en total.

It's just a rough idea, the biggest problem I find is placing 2.5 cm diameter valves in a 1cm3 or 1'5cm3 mini combustion chamber ....

What would be the advantage of the valves in the pre chamber? On the assumption that everyone seems to agree the path between main and pre is some configuration of tiny nozzles/jets aimed at accurately directing ignited fuel, with the valves in there too you are forcing the whole mixture and exhaust gas through the same tiny holes?
Again, apologies if I'm being overly simplistic. Come to think of it I might put that as my signature, since I seem to embed every post that way.

[dren]

The implementation is likely very simple, just hard to get the fine details ironed out.

[JuanjoTS]

What mechanism would activate the valves? Pushrods?

The traditional camshaft-pushing system resets them into the required position.

por etusch » 09 de mayo de 2017, 18:55

Parece inteligente en la primera vista, pero no estoy seguro si funciona.
En el otro lado, en su diseño, la válvula de escape debe ser su lugar habitual. válvula de admisión debe ser muy pequeño y también puede causar mayor cámara de pre. Cuando la válvula de admisión abierta no debe tocar enchufe y / o inyector chispa. Puede ser una válvula de admisión para cámara de pre y otra que es más grande que la válvula de admisión normal puede ser su lugar habitual.
Última edición por etusch 09 de mayo de 2017, 23:08, editado 1 vez en total.

It's just a rough idea, the biggest problem I find is placing 2.5 cm diameter valves in a 1cm3 or 1'5cm3 mini combustion chamber ....

What would be the advantage of the valves in the pre chamber? On the assumption that everyone seems to agree the path between main and pre is some configuration of tiny nozzles/jets aimed at accurately directing ignited fuel, with the valves in there too you are forcing the whole mixture and exhaust gas through the same tiny holes?
Again, apologies if I'm being overly simplistic. Come to think of it I might put that as my signature, since I seem to embed every post that way.

What I intend is a better control of the mixture and a perfect emptying of the exhaust gases of the main chamber and the mini combustion chamber.

[Anony Mous Engineerd]

[/quote]

We lack a lot of data to analyze this, how much exact power does Mercedes have for each cycle of explosion and with what exact mix? Just to list 2 basic aspects.
[/quote]

In either racecar engineering magazine, or Race Engine technology magazine, it is rumored that MB is reaching a total powerunit thermal efficiency of 50%.

[J.A.W.]

We lack a lot of data to analyze this, how much exact power does Mercedes have for each cycle of explosion and with what exact mix? Just to list 2 basic aspects.

1, M-B seldom seems to suffer race-ending, or even race-pace issues - threatening failure - due to "explosions"..
2, "Explosions" are a perplexing, yet seriously race-performance stymie-issue - for Honda, unlike M-B..

[etusch]

[youtube]https://youtu.be/FnXwOO1q5xo[/youtube]

[GhostF1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apc9AV9jCAI

This is an excellent video. Some great PU shots and comparisons of the RA615/616/617. The last two shots you can see the compressor of the RA616 protrudes way above the cam cover, the 617 it's not even remotely close to the top, first clear visual I've seen of the big improvement there. Great to see some nice photos.

[dren]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apc9AV9jCAI

This is an excellent video. Some great PU shots and comparisons of the RA615/616/617. The last two shots you can see the compressor of the RA616 protrudes way above the cam cover, the 617 it's not even remotely close to the top, first clear visual I've seen of the big improvement there. Great to see some nice photos.

The 2016 compressor shot is at 1:40.

[HPD]

@Albert Fabrega

- Honda comes with updates that do not require tokens.

- There is new fuel.

- The problem of alonso in russia, was located and solved, did not affect any part of the engine.

[F1NAC]

@Albert Fabrega

- Honda comes with updates that do not require tokens.

there are no tokens this year?

[3jawchuck]

@Albert Fabrega

- Honda comes with updates that do not require tokens.

there are no tokens this year?

He likely meant they don't require a new PU element. So then they'd be outside of the homologation area.

[loner]

@Albert Fabrega

- Honda comes with updates that do not require tokens.

- There is new fuel.

- The problem of alonso in russia, was located and solved, did not affect any part of the engine.

this is for sure the post Bahrain changes they will mix it in the midfield i think...