Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[shingles]

The Honda Jet thing sounds like marketing fluff or a misunderstanding to me.
The HF120 Honda Jet engine is a joint venture with GE (the first engines were made by GE actually) and other than the bearing technology there isn't really anything that would be carried over to an F1 engine. There is nothing magical about the HF120.

I've seen the internals of the HF120 engine in person - I wish I could say more but NDAs and all that.

I think that's backwards. The HF120 can from the HF118, which was a Honda design/prototype. Honda then partnered with GE to take the design further and for manufacturing and marketing purposes.

[restless]

Just read something related to TJI - Mazda plan to use such technique in their cars since 2019 - Spark Controlled Compression Ignition (SPCCI). They'll use supercharger...
And given 2019 as delivering to the market means they already have it working, right?
A bit strange that its not F1 participant who goes first with such engine

[GhostF1]

Just read something related to TJI - Mazda plan to use such technique in their cars since 2019 - Spark Controlled Compression Ignition (SPCCI). They'll use supercharger...
And given 2019 as delivering to the market means they already have it working, right?
A bit strange that its not F1 participant who goes first with such engine

It's a variant of HCCI that is only utilised at certain running conditions (eg. high load, high rpm), the rest of the time it is an as normal spark ignition engine due to difficulties in maintaing that state at all times. It's a clever step to get this to the public. Mazda have been doing good work lately.
In fairness, Honda, Chevrolet and various other manufacturers have all had their hand in some sort of clever combustion concept previously, beating others to market is an advantage to Mazda but that's not to say others don't have something else up their sleeves. I mean Hyundai and Infiniti have their Variable Compression & Variable displacement concepts that run with partial HCCI in the pipeline. So I wouldn't necessarily use it as a measure of "more competence" just yet, a lot of kudos yes.

[GhostF1]

Just read something related to TJI - Mazda plan to use such technique in their cars since 2019 - Spark Controlled Compression Ignition (SPCCI). They'll use supercharger...
And given 2019 as delivering to the market means they already have it working, right?
A bit strange that its not F1 participant who goes first with such engine

It's a variant of HCCI that is only utilised at certain running conditions (eg. high load), the rest of the time it is an as normal spark ignition engine due to difficulties in maintaing that state at all times. It's a clever step to get this to the public. Mazda have been doing good work lately.
In fairness, Honda, Chevrolet and various other manufacturers have all had their hand in some sort of clever combustion concept previously, beating others to market is an advantage to Mazda but that's not to say others don't have something else up their sleeves. I mean Hyundai and Infiniti have their Variable Compression & Variable displacement concepts that run with partial HCCI in the pipeline. So I wouldn't necessarily use it as a measure of "more competence" just yet, a lot of kudos yes.

[Tommy Cookers]

[quote=GhostF1]It's a variant of HCCI that is only utilised at certain running conditions (eg. high load, high rpm), the rest of the time it is an as normal spark ignition engine due to difficulties in maintaing that state at all times. ... Mazda have been doing good work lately.[/quote]

is that first sentence correct ?
ie wouldn't the CI be taking place at conditions other than high load/high rpm ?


regarding the question of the aero turbine side having something for F1 .....
50+ years of car turbocharging development isn't ideal to help us maximise turbine power as now
turbochargers only need enough turbine power to turn the compressor, maximising their turbine power as such is not a goal
F1 wouldn't have power recovery from the H without importantly higher turbine and compressor efficiencies than turbos
higher efficiencies at high PRs anyway ie high efficiencies at higher PRs

[Andres125sx]

The HF120 is designed for 5,000 hours between maintenance. At this point the Honda MGU-H seems good for about 5 hours

Turbines have always been way way more reliable than ICEs, actually that´s its best advantage even over flying speed when compared to any ICE, so nothing new here

And you´re comparing a production turbine with a prototype ICE, so the comparison is simply absurd. But yeah, I know, just kidding about Honda PU reliability, but it´s becoming tiring, specially when the bashing is nosense

[henry]

It's a variant of HCCI that is only utilised at certain running conditions (eg. high load, high rpm), the rest of the time it is an as normal spark ignition engine due to difficulties in maintaing that state at all times. ... Mazda have been doing good work lately.

is that first sentence correct ?
ie wouldn't the CI be taking place at conditions other than high load/high rpm ?


regarding the question of the aero turbine side having something for F1 .....
50+ years of car turbocharging development isn't ideal to help us maximise turbine power as now
turbochargers only need enough turbine power to turn the compressor, maximising their turbine power as such is not a goal
F1 wouldn't have power recovery from the H without importantly higher turbine and compressor efficiencies than turbos
higher efficiencies at high PRs anyway ie high efficiencies at higher PRs

I wonder if Honda's sequence of versions is allowing us to see the pursuit of those high efficiencies?

I imagine the process goes something like this.
You start with combustion process 1 (CP1) which is matched to Turbine 1 (T1) and Compressor 1 (C1)

You change to CP2 which increases ICE power, but it needs air flows that are in areas of C1's capability that are below its best efficiency. Likewise the turbine isn't matched to the new exhaust output. They can all work together by using the MGU-H which recovers less, or even drives when necessary. So ICE performance is up MGU-H is down, but overall PU performance is about the same or better so you introduce it.

Now you design C2 with delivery that matches CP2's needs more efficiently. Release that and the overall PU power goes up via the MGU-H.

Finally you make a new T2 which uses the exhaust from CP2 more efficiently to drive C2. And up goes the PU output again. So one more release.

By PU output I don't mean peak power. I mean the ability to deploy power to reduce lap time.

Once you're happy you start on CP3. Probably in parallel.

the need to redesign the compressor will depend on how different the air requirements of the Combustion Processes are. Maybe it's not necessary, or perhaps lower priority.

I imagine pursuing absolute efficiency in three interlinked components is not easy.

Maybe we shouldn't call them turbochargers?

[GoranF1]

Besides Mclaren era in the 90', how many suscesfull era has Honda had in F1?

[Joseki]

As a factory team they were quite competitive in the '65 and '04 seasons, as engine supplier at the end of the V10 era ('03-'05) they were probably capable of winning races on merit.

Looking from a wider prospective they had many low points, some competitive seasons and a single fantastic stint in the '80s.

[J.A.W.]

Besides Mclaren era in the 90', how many suscesfull era has Honda had in F1?

Actually Team Honda F1 scored the top step.. on an F1 G.P. victory box.. even before.. Team F1 McLaren did..

[GoranF1]

Besides Mclaren era in the 90', how many suscesfull era has Honda had in F1?

Actually Team Honda F1 scored the top step.. on an F1 G.P. victory box.. even before.. Team F1 McLaren did..

They won title?

[MrPotatoHead]

The Honda Jet thing sounds like marketing fluff or a misunderstanding to me.
The HF120 Honda Jet engine is a joint venture with GE (the first engines were made by GE actually) and other than the bearing technology there isn't really anything that would be carried over to an F1 engine. There is nothing magical about the HF120.

I've seen the internals of the HF120 engine in person - I wish I could say more but NDAs and all that.

I think that's backwards. The HF120 can from the HF118, which was a Honda design/prototype. Honda then partnered with GE to take the design further and for manufacturing and marketing purposes.

It is my understanding that the HF120 was a true joint venture project - with Honda Jet responsible for one half of the engine and GE responsible for the other half. GE then built the first running engines.
You are correct though that the HF118 was all Honda - an older less efficient design.
I've seen both in person.

[dren]

Besides Mclaren era in the 90', how many suscesfull era has Honda had in F1?

Actually Team Honda F1 scored the top step.. on an F1 G.P. victory box.. even before.. Team F1 McLaren did..

They won title?

You know the answer.

[dren]

The Honda Jet thing sounds like marketing fluff or a misunderstanding to me.
The HF120 Honda Jet engine is a joint venture with GE (the first engines were made by GE actually) and other than the bearing technology there isn't really anything that would be carried over to an F1 engine. There is nothing magical about the HF120.

I've seen the internals of the HF120 engine in person - I wish I could say more but NDAs and all that.

I think that's backwards. The HF120 can from the HF118, which was a Honda design/prototype. Honda then partnered with GE to take the design further and for manufacturing and marketing purposes.

It is my understanding that the HF120 was a true joint venture project - with Honda Jet responsible for one half of the engine and GE responsible for the other half. GE then built the first running engines.
You are correct though that the HF118 was all Honda - an older less efficient design.
I've seen both in person.

How were the responsibilities split between companies? I always thought GE was there more for the manufacturing side.

[MrPotatoHead]

I think that's backwards. The HF120 can from the HF118, which was a Honda design/prototype. Honda then partnered with GE to take the design further and for manufacturing and marketing purposes.

It is my understanding that the HF120 was a true joint venture project - with Honda Jet responsible for one half of the engine and GE responsible for the other half. GE then built the first running engines.
You are correct though that the HF118 was all Honda - an older less efficient design.
I've seen both in person.

How were the responsibilities split between companies? I always thought GE was there more for the manufacturing side.

It depends who you ask
Can't really say any more on the subject though I'm afraid.

Back on topic we go though.