Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[godlameroso]

Don't forget that the MGU-H is still capable of harvesting even with the wastegates open, with "blowdown" exhaust, like in the Wright TC plane did all those years ago. I remember the Renault engine does it, or did at the beginning of the season.

I'm not sure that's the case. I think it takes around 80 kw to drive the compressor and I think, although I can't remember why, that blowdown is only about 40 kw. Hence my suggestion of 40 kw drain on the ES. Maybe blowdown is more than 40 kw. Maybe a key difference between the power units is the ratio of blowdown to heat recovery. I don't know and I don't know how an external observer would find out.

Edit: I remember where the 40kw to drive the turbo comes from. It's in prof Limebeer's paper on optimal control from 2014. Can't find the paper on line but here's a presentation. http://www.matlabexpo.com/uk/2014/proce ... ystems.pdf Some grains of salt needed since he puts ICE output at 440 kw and MGU-H at 20.

It doesn't take 80kW to drive the compressor(not continuous anyway), more likely around 30-60kW(lower and upper limit) to achieve the desired pressure ratios. Maybe it takes 80kW to spool the turbo from rest, but even at idle the turbo is spinning. Harvested energy is the net product after the energy to achieve the required pressure ratio has been taken into consideration. There's ~400kW total energy in the exhaust, the turbine is extracting ~140-150kW of that total, up to ~60kW of that is swallowed up by the turbo, leaving 90kW(upper limit), if the turbo takes 80kW for a brief period, you still have as much as 70kW available for harvest. So under blowdown you can still harvest 10 to 20kW, or more if you're clever.

[GhostF1]

I think it was F1AT that has reported they were running updated engines and that they are sounding different also during the test (Also Honda saying they've added new components). As I overanalyse every soundclip I come across of the MCL32 running, this was porn.

https://twitter.com/McLarenF1/status/892761180430905345

It definitely does sound different to previous times.

[godlameroso]

It is sounding much better, at least compared to pre-season testing, it sounds much higher pitched.

[mclaren111]

Can Honda continue to work during the summer break or do they have to "close" their doors as well ?

[ArcticWolfie]

It is sounding much better, at least compared to pre-season testing, it sounds much higher pitched.

Agreed, noticed the same in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhwwfU1m0vA

So much smoother than before.

[fellowhoodlums]

Can Honda continue to work during the summer break or do they have to "close" their doors as well ?

As far as I am aware they can still work.Here is a quote from the rules.

"All competitors must observe a factory shutdown period of 14 consecutive days in July and/or August, during which time their wind tunnels and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) facilities must not be used for Formula One activities."

[godlameroso]

Doesn't say anything about dynos, although you have to wonder if it applies to engine CFD as well.

[Craigy]

Doesn't say anything about dynos, although you have to wonder if it applies to engine CFD as well.

It doesn't apply to engine teams.

[j.yank]

Don't forget that the MGU-H is still capable of harvesting even with the wastegates open, with "blowdown" exhaust, like in the Wright TC plane did all those years ago. I remember the Renault engine does it, or did at the beginning of the season.

I'm not sure that's the case. I think it takes around 80 kw to drive the compressor and I think, although I can't remember why, that blowdown is only about 40 kw. Hence my suggestion of 40 kw drain on the ES. Maybe blowdown is more than 40 kw. Maybe a key difference between the power units is the ratio of blowdown to heat recovery. I don't know and I don't know how an external observer would find out.

Edit: I remember where the 40kw to drive the turbo comes from. It's in prof Limebeer's paper on optimal control from 2014. Can't find the paper on line but here's a presentation. http://www.matlabexpo.com/uk/2014/proce ... ystems.pdf Some grains of salt needed since he puts ICE output at 440 kw and MGU-H at 20.

The paper can be found here: http://vdol.mae.ufl.edu/JournalPublicat ... covery.pdf

Look at pages 28-30, especially fig. 14 and 16 - they explain the differences between qualification and race lap. The main difference is that the waste gate is almost all the time closed (harvesting mode) in race lap but fully open (engine boosting mode) in qualification lap. In both cases it is clear that the main deficiencies of Honda are coming from the ICE - lack of pre-chamber ignition and worst torque curve - both of them lead to either lack of power in qualification lap or to more fuel in race distance.

[henry]

Don't forget that the MGU-H is still capable of harvesting even with the wastegates open, with "blowdown" exhaust, like in the Wright TC plane did all those years ago. I remember the Renault engine does it, or did at the beginning of the season.

I'm not sure that's the case. I think it takes around 80 kw to drive the compressor and I think, although I can't remember why, that blowdown is only about 40 kw. Hence my suggestion of 40 kw drain on the ES. Maybe blowdown is more than 40 kw. Maybe a key difference between the power units is the ratio of blowdown to heat recovery. I don't know and I don't know how an external observer would find out.

Edit: I remember where the 40kw to drive the turbo comes from. It's in prof Limebeer's paper on optimal control from 2014. Can't find the paper on line but here's a presentation. http://www.matlabexpo.com/uk/2014/proce ... ystems.pdf Some grains of salt needed since he puts ICE output at 440 kw and MGU-H at 20.

The paper can be found here: http://vdol.mae.ufl.edu/JournalPublicat ... covery.pdf

Look at pages 28-30, especially fig. 14 and 16 - they explain the differences between qualification and race lap. The main difference is that the waste gate is almost all the time closed (harvesting mode) in race lap but fully open (engine boosting mode) in qualification lap. In both cases it is clear that the main deficiencies of Honda are coming from the ICE - lack of pre-chamber ignition and worst torque curve - both of them lead to either lack of power in qualification lap or to more fuel in race distance.

Thanks. I have a copy so I'm familiar with the difference it suggests for Barcelona. I think the key thing about the paper is the methodology, the numbers are, I think, disguised, and certainly a long way off current.

My point was that, at Spa particularly, if you can reduce the drain on the ES by driving the compressor with blowdown you can deploy the wastegate for longer. It appears that Mercedes have a deployment advantage over the field in qualifying. I'm suggesting that difference in turbine implantation is an area that would offer an explanation for being better in qualifying but not so in the race.

It's a theory, that if you can make the same power with the turbo overall the higher the blowdown proportion the better.

Given Honda's overall deficiency it's an inevitable conclusion that they don't extract enough energy from the fuel. I think they are closer in qualifying where they can burn more fuel per lap. It will be interesting to see what their new turbo does for them.

[j.yank]

I'm not sure that's the case. I think it takes around 80 kw to drive the compressor and I think, although I can't remember why, that blowdown is only about 40 kw. Hence my suggestion of 40 kw drain on the ES. Maybe blowdown is more than 40 kw. Maybe a key difference between the power units is the ratio of blowdown to heat recovery. I don't know and I don't know how an external observer would find out.

Edit: I remember where the 40kw to drive the turbo comes from. It's in prof Limebeer's paper on optimal control from 2014. Can't find the paper on line but here's a presentation. http://www.matlabexpo.com/uk/2014/proce ... ystems.pdf Some grains of salt needed since he puts ICE output at 440 kw and MGU-H at 20.

The paper can be found here: http://vdol.mae.ufl.edu/JournalPublicat ... covery.pdf

Look at pages 28-30, especially fig. 14 and 16 - they explain the differences between qualification and race lap. The main difference is that the waste gate is almost all the time closed (harvesting mode) in race lap but fully open (engine boosting mode) in qualification lap. In both cases it is clear that the main deficiencies of Honda are coming from the ICE - lack of pre-chamber ignition and worst torque curve - both of them lead to either lack of power in qualification lap or to more fuel in race distance.

Thanks. I have a copy so I'm familiar with the difference it suggests for Barcelona. I think the key thing about the paper is the methodology, the numbers are, I think, disguised, and certainly a long way off current.

My point was that, at Spa particularly, if you can reduce the drain on the ES by driving the compressor with blowdown you can deploy the wastegate for longer. It appears that Mercedes have a deployment advantage over the field in qualifying. I'm suggesting that difference in turbine implantation is an area that would offer an explanation for being better in qualifying but not so in the race.

It's a theory, that if you can make the same power with the turbo overall the higher the blowdown proportion the better.

Given Honda's overall deficiency it's an inevitable conclusion that they don't extract enough energy from the fuel. I think they are closer in qualifying where they can burn more fuel per lap. It will be interesting to see what their new turbo does for them.

Yes, the numbers are far away from present but the logic in using the waste gate in race and qualification is the same. But I don't think that Honda burn more fuel per lap in qualification. Rather all engines run at max flow rate but because Honda is not so efficient they extract less power from the max flow rate. In the race is happening the opposite: the different engines run at different flow rates thus the amount of the fuel on board starting to play key role. Only in thus way you can explain the diminishing gap in lap time toward the end of the race, and best laps of Alonso, who switches to qualification mode when the fuel on board is low while the other guys are still in race mode.

[henry]

The paper can be found here: http://vdol.mae.ufl.edu/JournalPublicat ... covery.pdf

Look at pages 28-30, especially fig. 14 and 16 - they explain the differences between qualification and race lap. The main difference is that the waste gate is almost all the time closed (harvesting mode) in race lap but fully open (engine boosting mode) in qualification lap. In both cases it is clear that the main deficiencies of Honda are coming from the ICE - lack of pre-chamber ignition and worst torque curve - both of them lead to either lack of power in qualification lap or to more fuel in race distance.

Thanks. I have a copy so I'm familiar with the difference it suggests for Barcelona. I think the key thing about the paper is the methodology, the numbers are, I think, disguised, and certainly a long way off current.

My point was that, at Spa particularly, if you can reduce the drain on the ES by driving the compressor with blowdown you can deploy the wastegate for longer. It appears that Mercedes have a deployment advantage over the field in qualifying. I'm suggesting that difference in turbine implantation is an area that would offer an explanation for being better in qualifying but not so in the race.

It's a theory, that if you can make the same power with the turbo overall the higher the blowdown proportion the better.

Given Honda's overall deficiency it's an inevitable conclusion that they don't extract enough energy from the fuel. I think they are closer in qualifying where they can burn more fuel per lap. It will be interesting to see what their new turbo does for them.

Yes, the numbers are far away from present but the logic in using the waste gate in race and qualification is the same. But I don't think that Honda burn more fuel per lap in qualification. Rather all engines run at max flow rate but because Honda is not so efficient they extract less power from the max flow rate. In the race is happening the opposite: the different engines run at different flow rates thus the amount of the fuel on board starting to play key role. Only in thus way you can explain the diminishing gap in lap time toward the end of the race, and best laps of Alonso, who switches to qualification mode when the fuel on board is low while the other guys are still in race mode.

I didn't mean that Honda burn fuel at a higher rate than others. In qualification there is no limit to the quantity of fuel used which means that Honda can run at their lower power for the whole lap whereas in the race they run at lower power AND can't run it for as much of the lap. A double whammy. This means that they are closer to the front in qualifying than they are in the race. This double whammy effect, along with other compounding effects, like ability to add downforce, mean that even small improvements in power output can make big improvements in race performance.

I don't understand your point about diminishing gap in lap time.

[Muulka]

The paper can be found here: http://vdol.mae.ufl.edu/JournalPublicat ... covery.pdf

Look at pages 28-30, especially fig. 14 and 16 - they explain the differences between qualification and race lap. The main difference is that the waste gate is almost all the time closed (harvesting mode) in race lap but fully open (engine boosting mode) in qualification lap. In both cases it is clear that the main deficiencies of Honda are coming from the ICE - lack of pre-chamber ignition and worst torque curve - both of them lead to either lack of power in qualification lap or to more fuel in race distance.

Thanks. I have a copy so I'm familiar with the difference it suggests for Barcelona. I think the key thing about the paper is the methodology, the numbers are, I think, disguised, and certainly a long way off current.

My point was that, at Spa particularly, if you can reduce the drain on the ES by driving the compressor with blowdown you can deploy the wastegate for longer. It appears that Mercedes have a deployment advantage over the field in qualifying. I'm suggesting that difference in turbine implantation is an area that would offer an explanation for being better in qualifying but not so in the race.

It's a theory, that if you can make the same power with the turbo overall the higher the blowdown proportion the better.

Given Honda's overall deficiency it's an inevitable conclusion that they don't extract enough energy from the fuel. I think they are closer in qualifying where they can burn more fuel per lap. It will be interesting to see what their new turbo does for them.

Yes, the numbers are far away from present but the logic in using the waste gate in race and qualification is the same. But I don't think that Honda burn more fuel per lap in qualification. Rather all engines run at max flow rate but because Honda is not so efficient they extract less power from the max flow rate. In the race is happening the opposite: the different engines run at different flow rates thus the amount of the fuel on board starting to play key role. Only in thus way you can explain the diminishing gap in lap time toward the end of the race, and best laps of Alonso, who switches to qualification mode when the fuel on board is low while the other guys are still in race mode.

Not a chance they're running less than 100 kg/h FFR at any point. It's just not laptime efficient because the mixture's already so lean. Fuel saving is done by doing lift-off at the end of the straights and by reducing strategies which are fuel-costly.

[G'dayBruce]

I think it was F1AT that has reported they were running updated engines and that they are sounding different also during the test (Also Honda saying they've added new components). As I overanalyse every soundclip I come across of the MCL32 running, this was porn.

https://twitter.com/McLarenF1/status/892761180430905345

It definitely does sound different to previous times.

Where are you reading the bit about Honda having added new components? I was hoping there might be some new PU hardware in the test but Honda's own site suggests otherwise...

http://en.hondaracingf1.com

"The McLaren Honda team was also able to run through a full programme, testing new components on the car, as well as software updates and engine mapping improvements to the Honda power unit."

[PlatinumZealot]

Rubbiish. pure rubbish.