Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[ZakB]

If I don't know what to do, I hire people to do it.

This is honestly the thing that puzzle me the most. Haas created a team from scratch hiring people from other teams, Ferrari was behind in 2014 and hired a lot of people from Mercedes.
Why Honda chose to start with a brand new team with basically no previous F1 experience is beyond me, it's such an obvious thing. It's the ABC of motorsport.

One reason: they are located in Japan and have a completely different culture.

[HPD]

One reason: they are Japanese.

Please have a moderator delete this comment.

----------------------------------------------------------
Returning to the main topic. They are said to test spec 4.0 on the FP1, then return to a 3.6 engine for the rest of the weekend. (@Albert Fabrega)

[Joseki]

BBC wrote it's spec 3.7 for FP1 and then 3.5 for the rest of the weekend. Another incremental update.

[Craigy]

BBC wrote it's spec 3.7 for FP1 and then 3.5 for the rest of the weekend. Another incremental update.

Until something along the lines of TJI or HCCI is the basis of the combustion concept, aren't all the updates just incremental?

[Joseki]

Is a big update with with TJI/HCCI even coming this year? On vtec.net I've read that Honda will not have big updates this year.

Wait and see I guess, I've lost all hopes of a competitive Honda in the near future.

[taperoo2k]

BBC wrote it's spec 3.7 for FP1 and then 3.5 for the rest of the weekend. Another incremental update.

Until something along the lines of TJI or HCCI is the basis of the combustion concept, aren't all the updates just incremental?

Incremental updates are are likely required before they can bring the big upgrades. In so much as they probably need to change or tweak various parts of the PU to get it ready for a big upgrade package. Even then I wouldn't expect to see an immediate performance boost, as they'll need to iron out unforeseen bugs and get the maps working correctly.

[Craigy]

Is a big update with with TJI/HCCI even coming this year?

I would be surprised if Honda told anyone before putting the ICE into that new combustion mode.

If I was in charge of Honda, I definitely wouldn't tell anyone that I'd started running the really difficult to perfect ICE technology - would you?

As for the "spec 3/ spec 3.5 /spec 4" nomenclature - I find that quite pointless, really.
To me, it makes more sense if instead of talking about the "spec" levels, we just talk about the bits that have been upgraded, so instead of "spec 3.6" we say "new intake manifold" or whatever.
It's all I translate the spec things to in my head anyway.

[fellowhoodlums]

The spec 4 timeline can move much, it's Mexico or the race either side of it. As said, if there is another incremental change behond Vandoorne's v3.6 reliability update then it's v3.7

I was under impression Alonso would just get the v3.6 Vandoorne had at Spa.....which broke.....which is perhaps what the 0.1 change fixes.

I agree that they should just say what the reliability change is instead of the obsession (primarily with the media) of spec 3.x

Is that info is out there somewhere on FIA site? I think so but I can never find it and see the odd techincal posting put on here. It's never immediate either, Sunday or something before you see it.

[ZakB]

One reason: they are Japanese.

Please have a moderator delete this comment.

----------------------------------------------------------
Returning to the main topic. They are said to test spec 4.0 on the FP1, then return to a 3.6 engine for the rest of the weekend. (@Albert Fabrega)

Why exactly? It's how they work.

One can see the same sort of thinking going on in Japan quite often and I would argue that this is actually the biggest problem that Honda faces in Formula 1. One simply cannot compete if one does not have the right kind of talent, and finding that sort of talent within one single nation is very difficult. Honda only seems to use Japanese people, and it has very few foreign research and development engineers. They are also operating in Japan, out of the main vortex of F1 development, and so new ideas take longer to filter through. This is a problem for all non-British teams (although there is a mini-cluster of expertise around Ferrari in Italy) because hiring in the right people is more difficult. This is why Scuderia Toro Rosso now seems to have 140 people (about a third of its staff) working in the UK.

[restless]

I was under impression Alonso would just get the v3.6 Vandoorne had at Spa.....which broke.....which is perhaps what the 0.1 change fixes.

I thought it was claimed the problem was hydraulics, nothing to do with engine?

[BrunoH]

i think Honda do have to take some extream mesures... i think its time they throw all the ´´meat´´ on the fire!
i mean bring all the latest whateaver and just run it in at least one of the cars... all the time!!! make it take penalties every race ( alternating between drivers or not... ) and dont make new engine after all that for next year.. just more development on the current one... thats it! if they keep doing the delay because we need to make more tests... hell they will never catch up! the best test is in the car, in the track!

[PlatinumZealot]

Once it is not atmospheric pressure or lower it is back pressure. That is pressure resisting free-flow. By nature, a turbine is not free flow.

a turbine operating in blowdown conditions is free flow
there is no so-called back pressure ie the cycle-mean exhaust pressure above the turbine is notionally atmospheric
the turbine works because pressure in the blowdown period (to notionally atmospheric by bdc) is above n. atmospheric
(if of course the exhaust system etc scheme preserves these blowdown pulses for the turbine)

significant free power is recoverable by the turbine in this way
eg 6 -18% in the famously successful (mechanically supercharged) Wright 'Turbo-Compound' version of their Duplex Cyclone
eg c.8% in early tests by NACA on an NA engine

the real impediment is the thermodynamically disadvantageous flow choking (supersonic flow) inherent with the piston ICE's intermittent combustion
this disadvantage is reduced by raising exhaust pressure (density) due to the reduction in exhaust velocity

With all due respect It is not easy interpreting that outdated "blow-down" language, (Old man?). It is so hard to find modern material that use the term. I suppose you are talking about when the turbine is spinning down under no load conditions it behaves like a pump to "pull" the air out of the engine. I thought of this case but I did not mention it to keep things simple, as don't think the blowdown effect occurs at all with these hybrid engines. They always operate at high boost levels -and whenever before the compressor even gets a chance to freewheel the MGUH is there harvesting energy and loading the turbine.

[nzjrs]

i think Honda do have to take some extream mesures... i think its time they throw all the ´´meat´´ on the fire!
i mean bring all the latest whateaver and just run it in at least one of the cars... all the time!!! make it take penalties every race ( alternating between drivers or not... ) and dont make new engine after all that for next year.. just more development on the current one... thats it! if they keep doing the delay because we need to make more tests... hell they will never catch up! the best test is in the car, in the track!

I'd argue that is exactly what they are doing by bringing these incremental updates every race. I think you are being misled by the weird 3.X naming scheme the media seems to have crafted.

It's technically reassuring to see them finally and consistently climbing this gradient. It gives me hope they have their engineering processes in place and working. Whether the concept is wrong and this gradient only leads to 3rd best on the grid, only time (or Wazari will tell.

[hurril]

Once it is not atmospheric pressure or lower it is back pressure. That is pressure resisting free-flow. By nature, a turbine is not free flow.

a turbine operating in blowdown conditions is free flow
there is no so-called back pressure ie the cycle-mean exhaust pressure above the turbine is notionally atmospheric
the turbine works because pressure in the blowdown period (to notionally atmospheric by bdc) is above n. atmospheric
(if of course the exhaust system etc scheme preserves these blowdown pulses for the turbine)

significant free power is recoverable by the turbine in this way
eg 6 -18% in the famously successful (mechanically supercharged) Wright 'Turbo-Compound' version of their Duplex Cyclone
eg c.8% in early tests by NACA on an NA engine

the real impediment is the thermodynamically disadvantageous flow choking (supersonic flow) inherent with the piston ICE's intermittent combustion
this disadvantage is reduced by raising exhaust pressure (density) due to the reduction in exhaust velocity

With all due respect It is not easy interpreting that outdated "blow-down" language, (Old man?). It is so hard to find modern material that use the term. I suppose you are talking about when the turbine is spinning down under no load conditions it behaves like a pump to "pull" the air out of the engine. I thought of this case but I did not mention it to keep things simple, as don't think the blowdown effect occurs at all with these hybrid engines. They always operate at high boost levels -and whenever before the compressor even gets a chance to freewheel the MGUH is there harvesting energy and loading the turbine.

I always interpreted the blowdown aspect of the whole energy content as being the "pulse" as apart from the enter mass flowing. I should add that the little I've come to understand on this subject is all from this site... so.

[henry]

Once it is not atmospheric pressure or lower it is back pressure. That is pressure resisting free-flow. By nature, a turbine is not free flow.

a turbine operating in blowdown conditions is free flow
there is no so-called back pressure ie the cycle-mean exhaust pressure above the turbine is notionally atmospheric
the turbine works because pressure in the blowdown period (to notionally atmospheric by bdc) is above n. atmospheric
(if of course the exhaust system etc scheme preserves these blowdown pulses for the turbine)

significant free power is recoverable by the turbine in this way
eg 6 -18% in the famously successful (mechanically supercharged) Wright 'Turbo-Compound' version of their Duplex Cyclone
eg c.8% in early tests by NACA on an NA engine

the real impediment is the thermodynamically disadvantageous flow choking (supersonic flow) inherent with the piston ICE's intermittent combustion
this disadvantage is reduced by raising exhaust pressure (density) due to the reduction in exhaust velocity

With all due respect It is not easy interpreting that outdated "blow-down" language, (Old man?). It is so hard to find modern material that use the term. I suppose you are talking about when the turbine is spinning down under no load conditions it behaves like a pump to "pull" the air out of the engine. I thought of this case but I did not mention it to keep things simple, as don't think the blowdown effect occurs at all with these hybrid engines. They always operate at high boost levels -and whenever before the compressor even gets a chance to freewheel the MGUH is there harvesting energy and loading the turbine.

Try reading this topic. viewtopic.php?t=20312

In case you don't understand the relevance. Imagine if when the wastegates open the pressure in the exhaust goes down and ICE makes extra crank power. If in this mode the turbine still extracts energy from the exhaust pulses ( blowdown) that power can supplement the power provided by the MGU-H to drive the compressor. The more blowdown power the longer the wastegate open mode can be deployed.

The topic I reference above was topic 5 in a bing search for "blowdown turbine".

I'd refer you to my earlier post in this thread on the need to respect others terminology and mental models but I think I'd be wasting my time.