Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[GhostF1]

So the question.. Why is the Honda engine so bad?

Well lets again start with perhaps why it isn’t, we also know that the Honda engine in the paddock is classed as a GOOD engine (that’s right) and when it is fully developed it is likely to be a match for Merc and Ferrari. Sauber might not be so daft..

Engine tokens are ditched this year but this change needs real miles. Track time is non existent, and dynos are almost useless past producing a base map.

#SteveBarbyF1
https://thejudge13.com/2017/06/27/why-a ... explained/

I can't take this altogether seriously, part you cut out said, it's under powered and fuel heavy.... but then he says it's a known good engine in the paddock and it could be right up there when working. Sorry but this is nonsense. I can't believe an engine that lacks power and uses more fuel to produce less power is considered good. By the time it produces more power and uses less fuel to do it.... it will be a different engine basically. This engine is not good, because as he also says, it has a tendency to commit suicide. Down on power, unreliable and very inefficient any of which alone would make it uncompetitive but all three together, considering it a good engine is insane to me.

Then the latter, Merc have brought new engines, specifically new combustion chambers along with brand new fuel mix to the track and it work well straight away. His assertion that dyno testing is useless beyond basic maps is simply incorrect or Merc wouldn't have turned up to the first test each season with an exceptionally reliable and fantastically working engine. A bad dyno without the ability to mimic air pressure at different tracks and mimic changing air pressure/gusting wind, is a bad dyno considering what is required. A good dyno is provably very useful in testing an entire engine nearly to exhaustion as Ferrari and Mercedes have proven over the past three and a bit seasons. Track time is still huge, every weekend counts as track time, but again, it's proven that this isn't required to make a very very good engine. Can they be tweaked further from feedback from track testing, I'm sure, but Merc were lets say 98% of the way there when those engines turn up at the first test of the season.

It reads like an excuse, it is a good engine but lack of track testing is holding them back, with only more track testing they can turn this obviously great engine into what it should be. Reality check, this engine kinda sucks, if it's ever competitive there won't be many parts that are the same as in the current engine.

When it boils down to it, it's their 2017 design MGU-H that has caused all these issues. They've either detonated or just completely locked up. Causing endless stoppages, no battery power and it's becoming more obvious it is cast as one with the turbo so it's failure directly affects that also.
They added what they believe to be the countermeasure now as of Baku, so it's possible we have seen the end of the terrible reliability issues. That could be called wishful thinking in light of what's been going on, yes, but it's also an entirely possible scenario and if we are talking facts here, none of us can really comment until a few more races have taken place and they've both finished.

My assumption.. The new engine to be used in Austria will give a decent step forward, the only real information we have performance wise is Hasegawa quoting "we don't usually release figures but the upgrade brings more than two or three tenths" (his exact wording), that's literally the only non speculative statement in reference to the upgrade around.
I admit that each race, for the last bunch of GP's anyway, every time a yellow flag comes up on screen, I immediately assume it's a McLaren because there hasn't been any real hardware changes to the PU so its been a coin toss. But now, Baku was a double finish while debuting a new MGU-H design and with an updated spec ready to go for the next, I have genuine interest to see how it goes

[JonoNic]

Hasegawa quoting "we don't usually release figures but the upgrade brings more than two or three tenths" (his exact wording)

Isn't this what Honda was losing on the straights alone last year?

[GhostF1]

Hasegawa quoting "we don't usually release figures but the upgrade brings more than two or three tenths" (his exact wording)

Isn't this what Honda was losing on the straights alone last year?

Honestly, I couldn't tell you, but that's probably true.. at this point, any improvement is a welcome one, especially one they feel confident enough in quoting to the media.

[Facts Only]

So the question.. Why is the Honda engine so bad?

Well lets again start with perhaps why it isn’t, we also know that the Honda engine in the paddock is classed as a GOOD engine (that’s right)

I've neve laughed so much at anything on this forum, the most ridiculous thing i have possibly ever read.

A good engine? Nobody considers it a good engine. It has the lowest power, worst fuel economy and utterly shocking reliabilty. Its a complete laughing stock around my area of F1, a consumate example of what we need not do.

How on earth did you come to such an insane conclusion?

Edit: apparently its the Judge 13 who i have been laughing at. HPD was just quoting.

[nzjrs]

So the question.. Why is the Honda engine so bad?

Well lets again start with perhaps why it isn’t, we also know that the Honda engine in the paddock is classed as a GOOD engine (that’s right)

I've neve laughed so much at anything on this forum, the most ridiculous thing i have possibly ever read.

A good engine? Nobody considers it a good engine. It has the lowest power, worst fuel economy and utterly shocking reliabilty. Its a complete laughing stock around my area of F1, a consumate example of what we need not do.

How on earth did you come to such an insane conclusion?

Original article comes from https://thejudge13.com which is about as good of a source of information as Crofty.

[godlameroso]

Absolutely, manufacturing the ICE alone takes a little less than a work week at the very least. Not even GM can can do one of their LS blocks any faster.

I should have been more clear. Considering they already made one for Alonso, does the second one take the same time? Or the third, or the 4th (I presume they build as many as capacity will allow, in parallel.

So something about that quote seems odd to me.

Just the fasteners take a whole day to source, casting, and machining take another day or two, then parts QA, then assembly. Assembly itself is more than tightening some fasteners, there's oil feeds, vacuum lines, wiring harness. Then to the dyno for a base map, and system checks, then packing the power unit for freight. All that takes close to a standard work week.

These are not mass produced engines they are very much one offs.

As is, I think they'll make it to Austria with one spare, maybe 2, all arriving at the circuit sometime next week.

Most of the manpower is involved in R&D.

Just doing valve seats on a 5 axis CNC takes a few hours for a 4 cylinder engine. Honda has to manufacture the engine from scratch that's why from start to finish it takes a few days.

[MrPotatoHead]

Just doing valve seats on a 5 axis CNC takes a few hours for a 4 cylinder engine. Honda has to manufacture the engine from scratch that's why from start to finish it takes a few days.

Very very few people will do valve seats on a 5-axis cnc. If you do use a regular cnc machine for valve seats then you are stuck with form cutters which are less than ideal especially on engines this advanced.
Most likely they are using a Newen newen 2-axis cnc valve cutting machine which can be used to define an exact profile.

As far as the time taken to build a new engine it depends on many things.
Are they doing castings in house or is someone else doing it for them?
If the engine used at Baku is still in R&D like it seems then they might not even have quantities of many parts ready to assemble.

Hopefully the new engine Alonso will use in Austria will be reliable and have more power... not just the later.

[godlameroso]

Just doing valve seats on a 5 axis CNC takes a few hours for a 4 cylinder engine. Honda has to manufacture the engine from scratch that's why from start to finish it takes a few days.

Very very few people will do valve seats on a 5-axis cnc. If you do use a regular cnc machine for valve seats then you are stuck with form cutters which are less than ideal especially on engines this advanced.
Most likely they are using a Newen newen 2-axis cnc valve cutting machine which can be used to define an exact profile.

As far as the time taken to build a new engine it depends on many things.
Are they doing castings in house or is someone else doing it for them?
If the engine used at Baku is still in R&D like it seems then they might not even have quantities of many parts ready to assemble.

Hopefully the new engine Alonso will use in Austria will be reliable and have more power... not just the later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzfMJc521o0
Hnnnng.

[MrPotatoHead]

Just doing valve seats on a 5 axis CNC takes a few hours for a 4 cylinder engine. Honda has to manufacture the engine from scratch that's why from start to finish it takes a few days.

Very very few people will do valve seats on a 5-axis cnc. If you do use a regular cnc machine for valve seats then you are stuck with form cutters which are less than ideal especially on engines this advanced.
Most likely they are using a Newen newen 2-axis cnc valve cutting machine which can be used to define an exact profile.

As far as the time taken to build a new engine it depends on many things.
Are they doing castings in house or is someone else doing it for them?
If the engine used at Baku is still in R&D like it seems then they might not even have quantities of many parts ready to assemble.

Hopefully the new engine Alonso will use in Austria will be reliable and have more power... not just the later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzfMJc521o0
Hnnnng.

Indeed. That's a 2-Axis Newen exactly like I was talking about.

[PhillipM]

Of course it's considered a good engine in the paddock, Mercedes and Ferrari both think it's good that it's kept Mclaren out of the running

[PlatinumZealot]

So the question.. Why is the Honda engine so bad?

Well lets again start with perhaps why it isn’t, we also know that the Honda engine in the paddock is classed as a GOOD engine (that’s right) and when it is fully developed it is likely to be a match for Merc and Ferrari. Sauber might not be so daft..

We also know that new combustion technologies have been used by other teams that usual refer to it as a Thermally Efficient engine. It is a tricky system to get right, ask Renault. But when its right, its right. Ask Mercedes.

Control

In a TJI engine, the mapping is finely tuned to depict the amount of fuel and air that enters the bore and then precisely when spark ignites. In theory pretty standard stuff, similar to a conventional engine but hard to get things just right

With HCCI, things are even harder to control. As the sole form of igniting the fuel is from the compression (which generates heat). The way to control that is more complex. If the compression is too high too soon, the mixture will ignite too early, not high soon enough and the mixture will ignite too late to make it efficient.

The obvious way to control it is through variable timing of the valve, but that would probably mean it would be less efficient…and that would mean that less of the allocated fuel could be used purposefully and hence reduce the power of the engine.

Therefore…

We have to conceded to a minute understanding in comparison to dedicated engineers, and despite years in engine mapping, these guys have forgotten more than we will ever know about these engines, the problem Honda are having is in controlling the compression within the bore in order to obtain efficiency. The optimum band in which the detonation of the HCCI engine is at peak is minute and getting it to occur at that time is proving difficult.

Engine dyno testing is one thing, putting it into a car where many other variables are added is another. To give but one example; air pressure that can change enough in one lap let alone a race. The mapping then becomes so complex that it would almost have to re-write itself constantly to maintain itself.

Ineffective combustion = miss fire, poor power and economy through lack of efficiency

Detonation at the wrong time is a big problem. If the piston is at the wrong part of the stroke cycle you get a “knock” (an audible miss fire), and low power whilst it all gets adjusted. The unburnt fuel is effectively passed through the exhaust valves and out the exhaust. In short if the engine does not give up (and it probably will), it will be slow and terrible on fuel. Pistons are not meant to push when they should be sucking.

Running high boost adds to the issue (and I think the Honda does this, a lot). Hot countries or altitudes will effect the issue. This makes air intake temperature high. This means the cylinder fills with poor quality and less dense air, so the fuel that gets mixed to match the ratio (road cars are generally 15:1) is also going to create low power, so running in dirty air adds to the issue. These are issues that cannot be replicated on a dyno OR rolling road. In reality it needs real life experience and tiny adjustments, it needs track time and Honda have had the least.

Fuel Mix

An experienced F1 engineer told TJ13:

The mapping includes software tables that define certain fuelling conditions. E.G when airflow is X, fuel is Y and and ignition is Z. These engines need to be so fuel efficient that it is difficult to keep out of the detonation zone inside the cylinders and if you get much of that, its game over.

This can be especially difficult at certain rev zones and can cause big torsional oscillations through the power train…and I dunno – kill gearboxes.

So why is Honda struggling?

Well time is an issue, its had the least time to get this right and they have had no experience yet. There were rumours that Mercedes were going to assist Honda in certain aspects of development, my money is on the mapping. Mercedes have now backed that truck up.

It has been suggested that Honda should strap the PU in a GT car and drive it round its own F1 track, but again – the mapping is such a fine art that unless the airflow is identical to the F1 car, and it’s in traffic, there will probably be little to gain.

Then there is another idea, and it is just a theory BUT..

The fuel has many additives, one of which is OIL (see previous stories on extra tanks and bans for next year). Engines, tolerances and especially mapping are designed around fuel, oil and other additives that keep temperatures inside the cylinders down and results in a more reliable and predictable combustion. Understanding fuel, additives and they tiny details on how they effect combustion is ESSENTIAL to any mapping engineer.

Honda had developed all of its previous power units to specifically use Exxon-Mobil fuel but ahead of the 2017 season a very late switch to BP-Castrol fuel was needed after McLaren signed a new deal with the the British supplier. This would have been a massive blow. Engine tokens are ditched this year but this change needs real miles. Track time is non existent, and dynos are almost useless past producing a base map.

So I am going to say it… Have McLaren created a large chunk of the problems through a last minute trade deal?

Baku saw a new generation engine used, and SKY reported that they had bought it along basically as a dyno test. They retired and returned to the old engine because they feared the gearbox failure (power train oscillations in specific rev ranges anyone?) may have damaged the engine. It may have but I don’t think they ever intended on using it for the race. Just some track time.

#SteveBarbyF1
https://thejudge13.com/2017/06/27/why-a ... explained/

The judge 13 has been rubbish and is rubbish.

[drunkf1fan]

The problem is what Honda see in the lab consistently doesn't translate to the track. The even bigger problem is that when they believe something runs well in the lab they take it to the track and find a whole host of reliability issues. Where as I would bank on 95% of upgrades from Merc/Ferrari to come to the track working as expected and delivering within a couple percent of the power increase they expected, I just don't have that expectation with Honda upgrades. A history of missed power targets, new reliability problems and the wtf look on Honda's face as they say "we didn't see that on the dyno".

I mean, I genuinely hope that Honda create a competitive engine, too many teams struggling, gaps of 6/10ths covering the top 15 cars in qualifying is what I want to get back to, not 6/10ths being the gap between 2nd and 3rd, with the gap between 4th and 5th being another second, and the gap between 8th and 9th being another second. I just have zero faith that Honda has the personnel and facilities in place to bring great upgrades to track without major reliability issues.

[VFC_Cipher]

Slightly off topic, but TJ13 has had this entire article picked up and published on DriveTribe. Scary! People will think this is truth.

https://drivetribe.com/p/why-the-honda- ... 1Ij0isb-MA

[Nickel]

I mean, I genuinely hope that Honda create a competitive engine, too many teams struggling, gaps of 6/10ths covering the top 15 cars in qualifying is what I want to get back to,

Getting way OT here but if this is what you want to "get back to" I suggest you recalibrate your expectations. I'd go out on a limb and say this has never happened in f1 and never will, not even if you were to make it a spec series. You want something completely unrealistic.

[Facts Only]

Slightly off topic, but TJ13 has had this entire article picked up and published on DriveTribe. Scary! People will think this is truth.

https://drivetribe.com/p/why-the-honda- ... 1Ij0isb-MA

we also know that the TJ13 website in the paddock is classed as a GOOD website (that’s right)