Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[MrPotatoHead]

Hi folks, just to clear a few things up, there was never a scheduled update for Canada. I think a lot of wishful thinking on everyone's part. The next planned update is major in its scope and requires tremendous amounts of man hours to accomplish. Basically the whole top half of the PU should be new.

MGU-H bearing failure is a result of unforeseen multi-directional stress on the shaft and entire casing that houses the bearings.

Should have, could have, would have..........Can't turn back the clock. This whole relationship between McLaren and Honda was rocky from the start and hasn't gotten smoother. We all Honda's performance failings thus far and McLaren has had its share of internal strife also.

I think some underestimate the amount of man-hours and MONEY it takes to put together a current F1 PU together from concept to race-track. Especially with less than half the budget and manpower of the other three.

Thanks for your view on things Wazari-san!
I have been critical myself of Honda at times (usually when Alonso gets another DNF :/) but you are absolutely right - most people on here have no idea what it takes to build a high end race engine let alone one of the current F1 engines. I have some involvement in F1 and other race engines myself so I see what most do not.
I know Honda will get things right given enough time... I just hope that it's not the eve of the engine formula changing again!

Btw the next time I am in Japan I would like to buy you a glass of sake or two! Reading your input on these forums has always been nice for me.

He doesn't live in Japan.

Do you?

[Sasha]

Thanks for your view on things Wazari-san!
I have been critical myself of Honda at times (usually when Alonso gets another DNF :/) but you are absolutely right - most people on here have no idea what it takes to build a high end race engine let alone one of the current F1 engines. I have some involvement in F1 and other race engines myself so I see what most do not.
I know Honda will get things right given enough time... I just hope that it's not the eve of the engine formula changing again!

Btw the next time I am in Japan I would like to buy you a glass of sake or two! Reading your input on these forums has always been nice for me.

He doesn't live in Japan.

Do you?

No, but it feels like it.

[wuzak]

As an Engineer myself I very much agree with you. If it was me I would probably skip the single cylinder stage all together. I was simply saying I can understand how they got themselves in the corner they did.

The single cylinder prototype is no doubt a valuable development tool, because it is cheaper and quicker to build, test and modify than the full engine (ie V6).

[Wazari]

Thanks for your view on things Wazari-san!
I have been critical myself of Honda at times (usually when Alonso gets another DNF :/) but you are absolutely right - most people on here have no idea what it takes to build a high end race engine let alone one of the current F1 engines. I have some involvement in F1 and other race engines myself so I see what most do not.
I know Honda will get things right given enough time... I just hope that it's not the eve of the engine formula changing again!

Btw the next time I am in Japan I would like to buy you a glass of sake or two! Reading your input on these forums has always been nice for me.

My permanent residence is in the US although I still maintain a residence in Tokyo. Whether in the US or Japan, I would never turn down a glass of good sake.

In terms of developing a PU from a single piston/cylinder, design/mock up/working model, it's the only economically and expediate way. To build 3,4 complete prototype PU's would consume even more time to develop. The powers at be want everything yesterday. From concept to actual mass produced road car is a 7 to 10 year process. Trying to cut down that time frame by a factor of 5 requires a lot of money, manpower and unfortunately short cuts which always don't work out the first time.

[MrPotatoHead]

Thanks for your view on things Wazari-san!
I have been critical myself of Honda at times (usually when Alonso gets another DNF :/) but you are absolutely right - most people on here have no idea what it takes to build a high end race engine let alone one of the current F1 engines. I have some involvement in F1 and other race engines myself so I see what most do not.
I know Honda will get things right given enough time... I just hope that it's not the eve of the engine formula changing again!

Btw the next time I am in Japan I would like to buy you a glass of sake or two! Reading your input on these forums has always been nice for me.

My permanent residence is in the US although I still maintain a residence in Tokyo. Whether in the US or Japan, I would never turn down a glass of good sake.

In terms of developing a PU from a single piston/cylinder, design/mock up/working model, it's the only economically and expediate way. To build 3,4 complete prototype PU's would consume even more time to develop. The powers at be want everything yesterday. From concept to actual mass produced road car is a 7 to 10 year process. Trying to cut down that time frame by a factor of 5 requires a lot of money, manpower and unfortunately short cuts which always don't work out the first time.

I will send you a PM. Perhaps we can meet for some sake sooner rather than later.

I do understand how single cylinder testing can cut down on development time but you can also build multi cylinder mule engines that you can use for full engine development testing.
In the grand scheme of things only the cylinder head "should" have been experimental.

[MrPotatoHead]

He doesn't live in Japan.

Do you?

No, but it feels like it.

I love Japan. My first visit there was actually for some testing with Honda. Amazing place.
I also got to visit Suzuka which was very special.

[gruntguru]

Impossible to develop an engine like this in a reasonable timeframe without doing the combustion R&D on a single cylinder engine. To make incremental changes to a full V6 mule involves - for each change made:

6x component build
2 - 3x assembly/disassembly time
6x resources such as fuel, oil, dyno capacity
3 - 4x instrumentation
extra mapping time to optimise individual cylinders
etc
etc

[MrPotatoHead]

Impossible to develop an engine like this in a reasonable timeframe without doing the combustion R&D on a single cylinder engine. To make incremental changes to a full V6 mule involves - for each change made:

6x component build
2 - 3x assembly/disassembly time
6x resources such as fuel, oil, dyno capacity
3 - 4x instrumentation
extra mapping time to optimise individual cylinders
etc
etc

I disagree. And you can do single cylinder development on such a test mule anyway. Even Mahle did a lot of their TJI testing on a mule engine converted into 1 moving cylinder.
Every engine development project I've been involved in and personally seen has been a full engine development.

[MrPotatoHead]

Mahle did initial testing on an Optical Test Stand and then moved straight to a test mule made from a real engine with a custom crank:

[MrPotatoHead]

[ringo]

Multi dimensional stress on shaft and case means creeping on metal because of heat and forces? It is metallurgy issue or vibration issue? There is no shock asorber between H and Block? So H must be integrated within it, not bolted. What a risky design!

The H could still be a separate housing and be bolted solid to the block.
Almost everything on an F1 is bolted solid.

Hello Potato Head,
I'm not in the auto industry, but oil refining where very high temperatures and pressures factor into machine design. What's usually the case for these severe conditions is that the geometry must be such that during thermal expansion the casings must expand from a fixed point to avoid creating additional stresses on bearings. Machines not design for these conditions tend to have geometry that when the machine is exposed to high temps expansion is not even, and usually results in translation of the housings; instead of outward expansion from a fixed point, which can bend a shaft; and lead to premature bearing failure.
So i could be wrong as it relates to this turbo, but i see similarities with the bearings and housings, with what is experience with oil and gas pumps that are not designed to deal with extreme applications.

Even if the parts are bolted solid, thermal expansion must be such that there is no relative movement of the housing with the overhang of the shaft, to create a new bending stress which was probably not accounted for by the designers.

[MrPotatoHead]

Multi dimensional stress on shaft and case means creeping on metal because of heat and forces? It is metallurgy issue or vibration issue? There is no shock asorber between H and Block? So H must be integrated within it, not bolted. What a risky design!

The H could still be a separate housing and be bolted solid to the block.
Almost everything on an F1 is bolted solid.

Hello Potato Head,
I'm not in the auto industry, but oil refining where very high temperatures and pressures factor into machine design. What's usually the case for these severe conditions is that the geometry must be such that during thermal expansion the casings must expand from a fixed point to avoid creating additional stresses on bearings. Machines not design for these conditions tend to have geometry that when the machine is exposed to high temps expansion is not even, and usually results in translation of the housings; instead of outward expansion from a fixed point, which can bend a shaft; and lead to premature bearing failure.
So i could be wrong as it relates to this turbo, but i see similarities with the bearings and housings, with what is experience with oil and gas pumps that are not designed to deal extreme applications.

Even if the parts are bolted solid, thermal expansion must be such that there is no relative movement of the housing with the overhang of the shaft, to create a new bending stress which was probably not accounted for by the designers.

Hey ringo!

Usually in automotive parts clearances are designed such that when you are up to operating temperature and pressure you have the correct clearances.
Piston to wall clearance is a good example of this.
Turbos typically are designed this way as well.
Now what Honda took into account with their design of the MGU-H I do not know for sure... Perhaps some one screwed up.

Edit: Normally turbos are not bolted down solid unless there you take into account thermal expansion on the exhaust piping side also. So there is that to consider.
I personally would not bolt the turbo in a rigid state. I was simply pointing out that it could be fixed solid and be it's own housing.

[shryr]

I can't wait for this toxic relationship to be over. While, there is no denying Honda's shortcomings ever since their return, I am getting sick and tired of McLaren's constant public flogging of Honda.

McLaren has taken full advantage of the fact that they get more press time than Honda by taking every opportunity to shift the blame squarely on Honda. They have done every petty thing imaginable from mocking Japanese culture to straight lying about not forcing the size zero concept.

Their chassis was found out at the less-power-hungry tracks last year and no one heard so much as a squeak from them about it and here they are beating their chest about "possibly the 4th best" chassis on the grid.

It is worth remembering that McLaren has not won a constructors championship for almost two decades now. The last time they were regular world beaters was in large part due to Honda's domination.

[gruntguru]

Impossible to develop an engine like this in a reasonable timeframe without doing the combustion R&D on a single cylinder engine. To make incremental changes to a full V6 mule involves - for each change made:

6x component build
2 - 3x assembly/disassembly time
6x resources such as fuel, oil, dyno capacity
3 - 4x instrumentation
extra mapping time to optimise individual cylinders
etc
etc

I disagree. And you can do single cylinder development on such a test mule anyway. Even Mahle did a lot of their TJI testing on a mule engine converted into 1 moving cylinder.

Er . . . that's a single cylinder engine.

Every engine development project I've been involved in and personally seen has been a full engine development.

We are talking about far more than a "full engine development". This is the leading edge of combustion research.

[MrPotatoHead]

Impossible to develop an engine like this in a reasonable timeframe without doing the combustion R&D on a single cylinder engine. To make incremental changes to a full V6 mule involves - for each change made:

6x component build
2 - 3x assembly/disassembly time
6x resources such as fuel, oil, dyno capacity
3 - 4x instrumentation
extra mapping time to optimise individual cylinders
etc
etc

I disagree. And you can do single cylinder development on such a test mule anyway. Even Mahle did a lot of their TJI testing on a mule engine converted into 1 moving cylinder.

Er . . . that's a single cylinder engine.

Every engine development project I've been involved in and personally seen has been a full engine development.

We are talking about far more than a "full engine development". This is the leading edge of combustion research.

Typically single cylinder testing is done on a single cylinder unit. Not a full engine converted to a single cylinder.
Using the full engine mule enable quicker modular testing with anything from 1 to 6 cylinders in this case.
For instance you build a complete cylinder head and then when you are happy with 1 cylinder you can move on to 6 without starting from scratch.
We will have to agree to disagree on this I guess