Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[HPD]

The high-performance oil combustion is on everyone's lips, only from Honda you can hear nothing: Why that is so and you do not criticize Mercedes and Ferrari

- Honda did not use the oil trick to get closer to the competition.

- The burning of the oil in order to increase the engine performance was the technical theme of the past months. While Mercedes and Ferrari were suspected of being able to boost their performance over the additional burning of Mororenöl, especially in qualifying, which led the FIA ​​to lower the limits, a name never fell in this context: Honda.

- Have the already weakened Japanese neglected to use this trick? "The oil is important for the engine, not only as a lubricant, but also during combustion," Hondas project manager Yusuke Hasegawa, on request from 'Motorsport-Total.com'. "It is therefore inevitable that this will have an effect." Mercedes and Ferrari were "perhaps particularly good" in the use of this for the performance increase. "We have to learn something from their performance," says Hasegawa.

- While Renault has been complaining about the trick of the competition since the start of the season and has asked the FIA ​​to eliminate these horrors in the regulations, Hasegawa sees the matter more calmly: "I did not complain at Mercedes and Ferrari."

- After the third disappointing season, Honda is a McLaren partner. There is evidence that the Japanese will be supplied with the Toro-Rosso team next season. If the problems with the drive unit can be eliminated, one could also work with Red Bull in the future.
http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news ... 90512.html

[maguetox]

Is friction a design, material or manufacturing process issue?

As for people saying McLaren wouldn't be able to compete with RB- this is exactly what the last 3 yrs have done to the McLaren brand..

McLaren can beat any team on the grid, they're known for their ability to improve during the season more than any other team on the grid.

Pre-Honda McLaren wasn't at its strongest, but that still meant being on the podium/top six.

First of all they need to lower their shifting points so they will shift at 11500 as the others are doing. Increased RPM increases the inner friction of the ICE.

Not necessarily, because that depends of the lubricant itself and internal design they are using, also not good because at more rpm the ICE works, more gases which help to move more rapidly the MGU-H which in consequence generates more electricity, more efficiency for the same amount of fuel.

[etusch]

With new rule manufacturers don't prefer higher revs. But I am sure if there wasn't fuel flow limit or fuel limit for a race they would use 15k rpm.

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2016/08 ... od-ratios/

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2016/08 ... od-ratios/

[diffuser]

With new rule manufacturers don't prefer higher revs. But I am sure if there wasn't fuel flow limit or fuel limit for a race they would use 15k rpm.

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2016/08 ... od-ratios/

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2016/08 ... od-ratios/

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say no. They need to make the PUs last. Increases revs is gonna do the opposite.

[diffuser]

So if friction is an issue,it really surprises me, especially if it is one of the main reasons for the gap in power.

As Wazari has stated, ERS control is an area for improvement. That makes more sense to me. It also correlates to Alonso being able to set fast laps in between slower ones.

There was talk during the preseason about a 'trick' crank design being used. I wonder if the main bearings are an area of higher friction by design. I would think if that's the case, the shorter block design would have to outweigh the higher losses.

It could be that all of the components need to be refined in their design and interaction to improve mechanical losses. Whatever BP is supplying as lube oil might need some improvements, too.

I remember the trick crank being ruled out. I don't remember why.....

I presumed the friction issue Zak was talking about what just the MGU-H rotation sticking at points when the bearings had started failing.

[Wazari]

Wazari,

I don't mean to overstep a line and request information I am not entitled to, but is it within the realms of possibility you could shed some light on the friction claims by Zak Brown?
Is it in reference to the MGU-H or is friction an area within the ICE that is has ongoing development?

By the way, I haven't personally said this to you as others have, but thank you for sharing what you have done in the past. As a diehard fan, it's really appreciated!

I definitely know the issue and all I can say is "I knew it"....I would be out of line to say at this time but here are some points to ponder. Piston rings are very low tension, so.........Extremely low viscosity oil is used, so............Bearing materials are state of the art and tolerances are very carefully measured so.............Plenty of experience building high revving engines (20K RPM +) and these engines rev at a relatively low RPM's so............. So where would there be possible friction issues outside the engine block components and NOT the MGU-H unit or parts associated with the MGU-H? (I am not saying the MGU-H unit doesn't have friction issues but...........)

[bill shoe]

I definitely know the issue and all I can say is "I knew it"....I would be out of line to say at this time but here are some points to ponder. Piston rings are very low tension, so.........Extremely low viscosity oil is used, so............Bearing materials are state of the art and tolerances are very carefully measured so.............Plenty of experience building high revving engines (20K RPM +) and these engines rev at a relatively low RPM's so............. So where would there be possible friction issues outside the engine block components and NOT the MGU-H unit or parts associated with the MGU-H? (I am not saying the MGU-H unit doesn't have friction issues but...........)

This would seem to leave the MGU-K, or possibly accessories such as oil pump, water pump, etc.

I think someone previously said the MGU-K had a ~3:1 ratio of rotational speed relative to the crank. So it's spinning all day long at 30,000 to 35,000 rpm. The gear-drive connection between MHU-K and crank puts plenty of side force on the MGU-K shaft, and if you look at the shaft force vs. time closely you will probably see some force variation due to the individual gear teeth going in and out of mesh. Meanwhile, the block and MGU-K itself are being loaded severely because they are structural members thru the middle of the car, so the dimensional stability is not what you want.

The engine will go thru abrupt and brutal step-changes in rotational speed during gearshifts (rpm step-up with downshift, rpm step-down with upshift). This leads to early season MGU-K failures? One of the plausible countermeasures is more/larger/stronger bearings on the MGU-K. Makes friction worse.

If the MGU-K is spinning at 3x engine speed, then its rotational inertia will effectively be 9x higher on a per unit basis. So that's a lot of inertia to handle, especially during the abrupt shifts.

OK, so easy to see lots of potential problems with the MGU-K friction, but why does the Honda seem to have the reliability and friction problems? Does Honda turn the MGU-K faster than other power unit manufacturers? Do they mount it or drive it differently?

[PlatinumZealot]

Two words.

Lift and Coast.

In high efficiency engines the mechanical friction is extremely low compared to regular street engines. It is not a big part of the loss.. But in formula1 every tenth of percent counts especially when you lift and coast to save fuel. It can make a difference of a few meters off the throttle, how many meters into the charging zones, and... How much energy is used to eboost the compressor. So you see when the enegy transfers so many times between components the losses add up!

It is known that Honda has been working on getting the best bearings and lubricants for their engine. Seals are also energy hogs... The seals they are working on too.

[Oonnnn]

Wazari,

I don't mean to overstep a line and request information I am not entitled to, but is it within the realms of possibility you could shed some light on the friction claims by Zak Brown?
Is it in reference to the MGU-H or is friction an area within the ICE that is has ongoing development?

By the way, I haven't personally said this to you as others have, but thank you for sharing what you have done in the past. As a diehard fan, it's really appreciated!

I definitely know the issue and all I can say is "I knew it"....I would be out of line to say at this time but here are some points to ponder. Piston rings are very low tension, so.........Extremely low viscosity oil is used, so............Bearing materials are state of the art and tolerances are very carefully measured so.............Plenty of experience building high revving engines (20K RPM +) and these engines rev at a relatively low RPM's so............. So where would there be possible friction issues outside the engine block components and NOT the MGU-H unit or parts associated with the MGU-H? (I am not saying the MGU-H unit doesn't have friction issues but...........)

May I dare to assume that Wasari-san might refer to gearbox?

[ringo]

Wouldnt that be saying honda knows what flywheel horsepower they are getting but also know the measured power to the driveshaft on the track is very low compared to the engine dyno readout?
And f1 gearbox woth mguk has what % of frictional losses?

Outside of gearbox, maybe the clyinder heads and pumps or crank case?

[MrPotatoHead]

Let's keep it grounded.
The friction in question is on the engine side:

"It's friction, there's a lot of friction in the engine and as we know, friction is not what you want, that's costing us power, but they are trying very hard to get that sorted and they have developments in the pipeline so we will have to see what they have come up with and take a decision from there".

If I recall correctly the frictional losses on these engines is in the order of 5%.
If or some reason Honda were losing 10% to friction they would be ~ 50HP down.

[J.A.W.]

With new rule manufacturers don't prefer higher revs. But I am sure if there wasn't fuel flow limit or fuel limit for a race they would use 15k rpm.

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2016/08 ... od-ratios/

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2016/08 ... od-ratios/

Yeah, the writer of that linked article is poorly informed re: F1.. he appears unaware of the current F1- ICE situation..

The forced induction formula has swapped 'stratospherically' high rpm - for high boost at much more modest rpm..
..but both methods are costly - to get a promulgated 4T poppet valve mill to make real power - with longevity..

[JonoNic]

McLaren-Honda should swap engine with Williams - Mercedes they have worked in the 80 and this deal will be better for both parties.

I moved my post to the correct topic. Sorry bout that.

[Andres125sx]

He also mentioned something I hadn't heard before... In response to the the question of what the main issue is with the PU:
"It's friction, there's a lot of friction in the engine and as we know, friction is not what you want, that's costing us power, but they are trying very hard to get that sorted and they have developments in the pipeline so we will have to see what they have come up with and take a decision from there".

Interesting point. That's likely the root cause of the vibration issues. If Spec 4 delivers new pistons, CC, heads whatever other internal changes are rumoured, that really could lift their game. Gut feeling here, but I think Spec 4 could rear it's head in Malaysia, ahead of a hopefully stronger showing in Japan (an important home race for Honda and their pride) than last year.

How is friction the root cause?
Friction leads to energy dissipation as heat - if anything it would help dampen vibration.

Energy disipation as heat = energy lost. That, on an efficient formula like this is a shoot in your own foot, apart from the increased temperature wich increase cooling requirements, wich also add drag to the car

[mclaren111]

Formula 1 bosses are doing 'everything they can' to keep Honda in the championship beyond the end of the 2017 season.

Why not allow them extra testing days at the end of this year and early in 2018.