Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
Singabule
Singabule
17
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 07:47

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

godlameroso wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 18:06
toraabe wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 13:41
Piston speed.....
Aside from weak rods I still don't see how one overrev would damage the bottom end.
Vibration could destroy bottom end easily, as the load could higher than anticipated by design. This vibration occur at certain speed, and could be devastating, as in renault first turbo era. Even with pneumatic valve, the engine could not cope the load and boost more than 13000 rpm. Remember that engine has very larger B to S ratio, compared to honda and Ferrari engine. This vibration shaken loose all nuts and seals and lead to catastrophic engine failure. On the other hand, spec 2 honda engine is prone to lower rpm, and they afraid high rpm too since it is not designed to be operated on that high rpm

User avatar
diffuser
236
Joined: 07 Sep 2012, 13:55
Location: Montreal

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Could be just BS so they can use it at the next race without a penalty....

ArcticWolfie
ArcticWolfie
4
Joined: 23 Jun 2017, 18:37

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Both Hondas survived the Baku strain :D even heard Alonso reached 350,1kph @ finish line speed trap :shock: probably a tow + DRS but still.. seems Honda is really getting on it now.
Renault had 3 engine failures this race ](*,) (I'm a Verstappen fan)

j.yank
j.yank
24
Joined: 08 Jul 2015, 13:45

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Looking at the speed trap and maximum speeds in all sectors, are we sure that Alonso didn't run the updated PU after all?

User avatar
RedNEO
30
Joined: 09 Jul 2016, 12:58

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

j.yank wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 22:19
Looking at the speed trap and maximum speeds in all sectors, are we sure that Alonso didn't run the updated PU after all?
Slipstream/double slipstream mate nothing to do with the lack of power.

ZakB
ZakB
-2
Joined: 08 Jun 2017, 09:29

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

j.yank wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 22:19
Looking at the speed trap and maximum speeds in all sectors, are we sure that Alonso didn't run the updated PU after all?
They also changed their downforce levels on Saturday.

wuzak
wuzak
467
Joined: 30 Aug 2011, 03:26

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Singabule wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 18:25
Remember that engine has very larger B to S ratio, compared to honda and Ferrari engine.
Bore to stroke ratio mus be the same, within a small tolerance.

The capacity must be 1600cc +/-10cc and the bore must be 80mm +/-0.1mm.

So the bore:stroke ratio must be between 20.15 and 19.85. Or 20 +/-0.75%

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
559
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Hmm i can imagine everyone is at 1610cc with a bigger stroke.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

Racing Green in 2028

gruntguru
gruntguru
566
Joined: 21 Feb 2009, 07:43

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Del Boy wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 12:21
Wazari wrote:
24 Jun 2017, 07:10
This new "spec" is not 3.0. That is still further down the road. Think more of spec 2.2, 2.5 that was in Alonso's car. As far as not running the current PU, it needs to be examined before further running. When the gearbox let go, it severely over-revved the PU so it should not be run this weekend without potential damage analysis.
Severely over-revved? Not according to my source!
Agreed. Unless the "transmission failure" selected a lower gear, the engine will not exceed 15k rpm - even when suddenly unloaded at max power.
je suis charlie

gruntguru
gruntguru
566
Joined: 21 Feb 2009, 07:43

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:
26 Jun 2017, 00:33
Hmm i can imagine everyone is at 1610cc with a bigger stroke.
Or 1590cc?
je suis charlie

wuzak
wuzak
467
Joined: 30 Aug 2011, 03:26

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

gruntguru wrote:
26 Jun 2017, 00:49
PlatinumZealot wrote:
26 Jun 2017, 00:33
Hmm i can imagine everyone is at 1610cc with a bigger stroke.
Or 1590cc?
I don't know about that, but some allowance must be made for bore wear?

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
559
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Bore wear.. Ok let us work it from that angle.
If you have a 80mm bore and stroke of 53.25mm the displacement is 1606 cc
If the bores wear to 80.1mm the legal limit.. The displacement increases to 1609.99 cc... Within the legal limits.

This is assuming bore wear is typically 0.1mm. On the other hand.. Wazari coyly said 1590cc without saying why.. But if he meant for wear then we can sorta estimate that the bore wear is as high as 0.5mm in all cylinders.

Sounds ok?
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌✍️🐎🏆🙏

Racing Green in 2028

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

If they use they type of coating I think they use, bore wear should be fractions of a mm in the ICE's life cycle.

Maybe 1590 to have the shortest possible crank throw, and trying to increase dwell time with longer rods.
Saishū kōnā

gruntguru
gruntguru
566
Joined: 21 Feb 2009, 07:43

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

I said "1590cc" because I believe best power under this formula would be obtained with a smaller engine. The rules allow +- 10cc so 1590 it is. As for Bore/Stroke, the teams would also aim for the bore limit that gives best power - I would think smaller ie 79.9 mm. Of course we are talking about miniscule gains here - perhaps 1 or 2 hp.
je suis charlie

Singabule
Singabule
17
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 07:47

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

wuzak wrote:
26 Jun 2017, 00:30
Singabule wrote:
25 Jun 2017, 18:25
Remember that engine has very larger B to S ratio, compared to honda and Ferrari engine.
Bore to stroke ratio mus be the same, within a small tolerance.

The capacity must be 1600cc +/-10cc and the bore must be 80mm +/-0.1mm.

So the bore:stroke ratio must be between 20.15 and 19.85. Or 20 +/-0.75%
First turbo era of 80's. Sorry for confussion