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.
COG makes a difference but isnt a performance differentiator this year. As we have seen; the Wo8 and other merc powered cars aren't being lauded for exceptional chassis dynamics.
So COG somewhat is peripheral benefit when we compare the typical layout against the split turbo.
Considering temperature now, it's not really such a big deal. You have cooling systems on the turbo and also insulation to manage that. The mercedes might need less of these, but the reduction in heat input into the compressed air in the compressor housing isn't a performance differentiator.
Mercedes main advantage is in their combustion, energy recovery and reliability.
Ferrari has done well to match that this year. There is nothing that i have seen over the past 6 races to suggest that the ferrari engine is not just as good as the mercedes. Ferrari is matching them everywhere.
Honda now have issues with those three things listed, combustion, recovery and reliability.
If COG isn't a factor then I don't think that Honda would have invested such efforts making their COG as low as possible. IMO their performance now with this mediocre PU is due exactly of their better COG which gives them possibility to be maybe the best chassis entering the corners. In P3 today in the first sector they were almost equal to Mercedes and Ferrari, and equal to RedBul. This can be achieved only with very good mass balance, and you cannot get this without good COG.
Yes, the combustion is a key but in my opinion Ferrari is gaining with their chassis now, not with PU. Somehow their interpretation of the new rules are better than Mercedes. Explanations of Hamilton speak about this, too.
The CoG height is limited by the regulations.
I doubt there is much of an advantage there compared to the other manufacturers.
Compared to the very tall 2016 engine chassis wise this engine is a giant leap forward in terms of COG and packaging.
During fp3 broadcast on sky sports f1 hasagawa was interviewed he mentioned that honda is seeking help from outside their company.
Thinking like whoever from outside can make Honda PU better is not true, so they have to find right partner but for this season it looks like a bit late. İf someone will not come a ready design just need to adapt Honda PU.
["Honda's working very hard but they seem a bit lost," he told Reuters. "We were only told recently that we wouldn't have the upgrade coming (in Canada)," he continued, "and we don't have a definitive timeline, which is concerning because the pain is great and we can't sit around forever.
"The (McLaren) executive committee have now given us our marching orders," he admitted. "We're not going to go into another year like this, in hope."
Speaking to reporters in Montreal, Honda's engine boss refuted Brown's claim.
"It is very difficult, it is very unfortunate, I can't convince them we are going in the right direction," he said.
"I am confident we are not lost. We still need some more time but we are doing the right thing. We are doing many things to speed up our development but I don't disclose what.
"I was not surprised," he continued, referring to Brown's comments. "It's no wonder he has complained, he is frustrated.
"I'm frustrated," he admitted, "I'm disappointed, the team is disappointed. This is a very difficult, tough situation.
"We are strong and connected as a team," he insisted. "We have decided to overcome these very tough conditions as a team together. We're working together to improve the situation
During fp3 broadcast on sky sports f1 hasagawa was interviewed he mentioned that honda is seeking help from outside their company.
He didn't say that exactly. He was asked if honda have a problem with external help.He said no, as they aren't against consultants. He didn't say he was seeking help, or that Honda is receiving help.
During fp3 broadcast on sky sports f1 hasagawa was interviewed he mentioned that honda is seeking help from outside their company.
He didn't say that exactly. He was asked if honda have a problem with external help.He said no, as they aren't against consultants. He didn't say he was seeking help, or that Honda is receiving help.
But that ain't new. Simon Gilles had been there since a long time. Sometimes I feel that almost everything has been already discussed in the thread and we are repeating the same thing again and again and again.
Alonso was about 2.2 seconds off of pole this year compared to about 1.5 last, that's not an improvement is it? Admittedly, as the front end are closer maybe the front runners are being harsher on engines, also Alonso didn't get to Q3 unlike last year, but still. A little disheartening.
Honda nearly at Renault level - that surely is blind optimism?
Maybe they are the most improved since the beginning of the season, but I would question that they are from last season to this.
It's what the data says. Honda have been there or thereabouts with Renault for some time. Wazari said they finished last season with a difference to Renault of single figures (contrary to popular belief). They had a wobble at the start of the season while they got the pu working, but when it does its a match for Renault.
.... and then came the Race on Sunday where they have to save Fuel like no one else...
Peak Power is only a small Portion of these PU's, sustained Power and Efficiency are key.
We certainly hear the drivers complain of fuel saving, but Mclaren aren't the only team to be doing a lot of fuel saving. How do we evaluate or assess who is making the most fuel saving? We tend to see Mclaren perform well in the opening laps which could suggest they are lighter than other cars which would definitely lead to further savings.
What you say could be true or it could be completely wrong, I'm not sure how we can make an evidence based judgement on it.
It's what the data says. Honda have been there or thereabouts with Renault for some time. Wazari said they finished last season with a difference to Renault of single figures (contrary to popular belief). They had a wobble at the start of the season while they got the pu working, but when it does its a match for Renault.
.... and then came the Race on Sunday where they have to save Fuel like no one else...
Peak Power is only a small Portion of these PU's, sustained Power and Efficiency are key.
We certainly hear the drivers complain of fuel saving, but Mclaren aren't the only team to be doing a lot of fuel saving. How do we evaluate or assess who is making the most fuel saving? We tend to see Mclaren perform well in the opening laps which could suggest they are lighter than other cars which would definitely lead to further savings.
What you say could be true or it could be completely wrong, I'm not sure how we can make an evidence based judgement on it.
Looking at live timing during the Spanish GP, i'm pretty sure that the Honda likes fuel more than the others.
I can't see how the combustion would be the problem with the quoted vibrations. Maybe it's the "source" as in what puts in the energy. Well, yeah, what else is producing energy in the engine?
Thinking about it, the pressure gradients translate into the crankcase, but then that is something that is measurable and basic knowledge in series production engines. Something, Honda isn't to bad at.
If I would need to hazard a guess it is something in the cranktrain or drive of camshafts or other auxiliary drives. Those can be a bitch to tune, especially if we keep in mind, that everything on an F1 engine is mounted solid. There's no "engine mounts" that can flex and compensate for some vibrations. Then again, that is something someone from the bike engine department should know everything about, because all bike engines (at least for sporty bikes) are stressed members of the frame and come without insulation for that reason.
As for the 1-cylinder testing and transferring it to the full engine. You do it for the design of the combustion system, almost nothing else. The combustion system includes the shape of the piston surface, the shape of the cylinder head surface, valve angles, valve geometry, port geometry. That's essentially it. You can also get some information on piston friction, but that is usually not of particular interest on those test engines.
I usually see the 1-cylinder test engine used, when a new combustion system is being developed by an OEM, or for more basic R&D investigations in real research projects. Nowadays, this combustion system is then used in at least a third of the engines the OEM will develop within the next number of years. Smaller tweaks will be tried out directly on full engines. Also there's more and more tendency to try to get away with just 3D-CFD analysis combined with advanced combustion chemistry. I have seen some seriously good results on that.
For the current F1 engines I think 1-cylinder testing makes a lot of sense, because you can focus more on the crucial combustion system. However, as MrPotatoHead said, at some point you have to move to the full engine. Rather earlier than later in my opinion. Ideally in parallel to see early on the problems in the periphery that cannot be tested on the 1-cylinder, while still optimizing on the 1-cylinder. Basically you need a lot of manpower and money. Otherwise you will just be slower, simple as that.
Regarding the topic of outside help - I know for a fact, that Honda has been working with engineering specialists for quite some time now. Stuff like 3D CFD investigations of in-cylinder flow and combustion processes as well as some component testing. Can't say much more. These have been done by companies that have long lasting partnerships with Honda in series engine development.
What I see as one of the main problems is, that they're not taking a racing or F1 approach to this whole thing. I'm currently working in government-funded research projects as well as industry projects from feasibility studies in the early research phase up towards pre-production development. Previously I have also worked in a racing environment. The way how you work is a lot different. Obviously, the same engineering principles and physical equations apply, but the way how you apply your knowledge and how you perform testing and development is fundamentally different. Outside of racing and academic research for example, I rarely see people being interested in understanding the behaviour of a system 100% at any given time. You only try to understand what is necessary to achieve your desired result. If something behaves a bit unexpected but nothing bad happens due to it on the test bench, you wouldn't necessarily invest the money to perform a thorough investigation for example. There are many more examples, but maybe this shows it somewhat.
I for one am also not surprised that Renault is still struggling. From what I've seen from the French manufacturers, their approach to engine development or development in general is quite far off of what is needed in F1. In addition, they're a very proud bunch of people that take a bit more time to realise that they've messed up in comparison to the british or german engineers I've worked with. (I hope this is not being viewed as racism or anything. It is just an observation of cultural differences between certain countries that I've made in several projects either by myself or through colleagues.) Having been involved in 4 different projects with japanese manufacturers, I can appreciate some of the comments that have been made about cultural differences. I've only spent about 6 weeks working in Japan on different occasions thus far, but I can say, that I'm a fan of Japan and the japanese people in general. So it's not like I don't like them.
Coming back to the topic of injector layout. I think it is one "conventional" DI injector with a lot of attention to the spray targeting. You would have a big injection during the suction stroke in order to get a good mixture preparation to achieve a homogenous charge at ignition. In addition to this injection, I would think the inject a very small amount after the bottom dead center, when the piston is moving upwards. Probably somewhere around the peak of piston speed. At this time, the pressure increase per crank angle is the highest and thus, the flow through the holes of the pre-chamber (from the main combustion chamber into the pre-chamber) will be fastest. The flow into the pre-chamber will then carry some of the injected fuel from the second injection with it. Getting this just right, so the mixture inside the pre-chamber is ideal in the whole operating range of the engine, would be one of the biggest challenges. In addition, you need to avoid excessive wetting of the pre-chamber outer surface during the main injection (or make sure it evaporates completely). The second injection should be as small as possible, because anything else will lead to a less homogeneous cylinder charge at ignition, which again is not ideal for thermal efficiency. That might explain, why it takes a lot of time. The injectors are parts from suppliers (as mentioned by someone, they won't make them on their own, it's too much knowledge they just don't have) and getting new ones with different spray targets or different minimum/maximum flow capacities takes a bit of time. Just the spray target is quite fast, but still some delay. Also, changes in the injector mounting position mean completely new heads and there will definitely be some testing in that area. The shape, size and exact position of the pre-chamber is also an area of optimisation and a lot of testing. This just leads to a lot of different combinations that need to be tried out. Thus you need a lot of manpower and money (more money means faster turnaround of parts, simple as that).
(Side-note: There is a flow from the main combustion chamber to the pre-chamber during the compression stroke, please don't try to argue that, that would be silly. The pressure in the combustion chamber is increased and in order for the pressure in the pre-chamber to equalise, there has to be a mass flow into the pre-chamber. In other terms, there is a delta-p over the orifices in the pre-chamber, resulting in a mass flow.)
I think some drivers do fuel saving from the first pit till half of the race.
Remember what happened in Spain in the first lap, makes sense that the car getting slower.
Start from half of the race, his laptime getting more better, although he was still struggling to manage them consistently at certain level.
When it comes to science , what I ❤ much about it is analyzing the .
I think because of resonance they cannot operate at the optimal RPM and maybe this is related to the design of their combustion process. If someone knows for sure what is the reason he will get immediately a job in Honda
[/quote]
I think their vibration issue is not related to their cumbustion method, it's engine stiffness as it's said that they have reached a good level of weight cut down and now they are limited to improve stiffness due to tight packaging limitation.
During fp3 broadcast on sky sports f1 hasagawa was interviewed he mentioned that honda is seeking help from outside their company.
He didn't say that exactly. He was asked if honda have a problem with external help.He said no, as they aren't against consultants. He didn't say he was seeking help, or that Honda is receiving help.
But that ain't new. Simon Gilles had been there since a long time. Sometimes I feel that almost everything has been already discussed in the thread and we are repeating the same thing again and again and again.
Honda dumped Simon earlier this year. He doesn't work for them any more.
science 
is analyzing the 
.
