Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[etusch]

A more efficient ICE also needs less boost from the turbine and less help from the ERS so it is a double gain. Less load on the mguh and KERS. The ICE is really the key to everything.

And quotes from Honda stating "we are there or thereabouts on ICE" are a window on the mindset of the organisation. Either they don't understand the above or they are resource limited and a focussing on quick wins and low hanging fruit.

Being good on ice mean they don't force limit at ERS ? I don't think so. And Merc says they are 50% efficient. Doing this with efficient İCE make Merc's work more respectful. You can be down on ice 40 hp but if you can use mgu-k power longer that 40 hp is not that important. I believe merc makes main difference at electricity.

[stevesingo]

A more efficient ICE also needs less boost from the turbine and less help from the ERS so it is a double gain. Less load on the mguh and KERS. The ICE is really the key to everything.

And quotes from Honda stating "we are there or thereabouts on ICE" are a window on the mindset of the organisation. Either they don't understand the above or they are resource limited and a focussing on quick wins and low hanging fruit.

Being good on ice mean they don't force limit at ERS ? I don't think so. And Merc says they are 50% efficient. Doing this with efficient İCE make Merc's work more respectful. You can be down on ice 40 hp but if you can use mgu-k power longer that 40 hp is not that important. I believe merc makes main difference at electricity.

The way I see it is, if you make the ICE 100% efficient, then you don't need KERS. I know that is not possible.

If we improve ICE efficiency, we convert fuel into heat in the combustion chamber, heat into kinetic energy via piston/rod/crank. Each one of those conversions is less than 100% efficient so there is waste generated. Some of the waste is the harvested by the MGU-H, Heat-Kinetic-Electric-Kinetic. Each one of those conversions is also less than 100% efficient, so more waste.

The focus should be to remove the waste at the earliest opportunity. Of course, we get to the laws of diminishing returns, so greater overall gains may be available by focussing on MGU-H.

[NL_Fer]

A more efficient ICE also needs less boost from the turbine and less help from the ERS so it is a double gain. Less load on the mguh and KERS. The ICE is really the key to everything.

Now hou got me thinking. Mercedes runs much more boost and leaner mixture. Would the combustion be cooler than the others and would the enormous amounts of cool exhaust gasses also keep the turbo in a better shape?

[GhostF1]

A more efficient ICE also needs less boost from the turbine and less help from the ERS so it is a double gain. Less load on the mguh and KERS. The ICE is really the key to everything.

Now hou got me thinking. Mercedes runs much more boost and leaner mixture. Would the combustion be cooler than the others and would the enormous amounts of cool exhaust gasses also keep the turbo in a better shape?

Theoretically, running the engine leaner would increase the combustion temperature.

[godlameroso]

It will be hotter if you run leaner as in closer to stoichiometric but still well below it, like in a road car engine you'd want to run ~12:1 A/F ratio on boost, and you'd run hotter if you were running 12.7, or 13:1, but if you're running say 15, or 16:1 you will run cooler.

[sosic2121]

There is actually a way to see the deployment on the live feeds. There is a battery charge icon on the dashboard graphic that sometimes is shown simultaneously for two cars. In the Brazil race when Lewis was chasing Kimi you could see that the Ferrari was charging and deploying just about the same as Mercedes over those four laps. And these were full power laps accorring to Toto. Very valuable information if you ask me. If we could get an onboard for Alonso in the race we might be able to sync the videos and compare the deployment.

Have you seen ERS graphics during Mexican GP? Mercedes seemed to deploy less than Ferrari and Renault engines!?

Are you referring to that primitive HUD-graphics that is sometimes displayed? I don't think those are worth that much.

Yes I am.
Is there any other way of monitoring deployment?

Also, anyone knows what exactly that blue line represents?

[sosic2121]

Or they have enough recovery through MGU-H that they don't need to deplete the ES to maintain full 120kW assist from the MGU-K?

It crossed my mind.

[NL_Fer]

It will be hotter if you run leaner as in closer to stoichiometric but still well below it, like in a road car engine you'd want to run ~12:1 A/F ratio on boost, and you'd run hotter if you were running 12.7, or 13:1, but if you're running say 15, or 16:1 you will run cooler.

It is suggested that Mercedes runs 25-30:1 AF-ratio. That must be cooler than stoich. Unless they use the excess air to burn oil

[MrPotatoHead]

The biggest limiting factor for Honda would yet again be the lack of track testing as by their own admission their dynos are not sophisticated enough to replicate the loads and stresses the various components are subjected under the G-forces on track. It is actually not even a secret that the Spec-4 has been on bench testing for months now. This was supposed to debut in Mexico according to Honda's internal timelines but never made it and it is not just because of the divorce rather Honda's lack of confidence in the reliability of the spec despite being on the bench forever. In Preseason testing they will have only Toro Rosso to rely on engine mileage and data collection while all other manufacturers will have three teams each munching miles.

MGU-H have been subjected to premature failures mainly due to cooling issues. Next year each MGU-H has to do 7 races and we still do not know if they have found a permanent and reliable fix as Honda have yet to run an MGU-H for more than two races this season. Alonso ran old PU on Friday in Brazil and a new one from Saturday onwards. The MGU-H is where the technical superiority of Mercedes and Ferrari lies. I agree with the general sentiment that the ICE is no longer the major performance differentiator rather the need for recovering and deploying electrical energy via MGU-H is where Honda lags significantly.

They also had many issues due to manufacturing problems as well.
The dyno problem is more about the transients and inertia simulation that lets them fully simulate the ERS systems i believe. Not G Loading. If you cannot simulate the dynamics of the car on the track then you cannot simulate the ERS response and interplay other than running on track. A big problem when you only have 1 team and reliability issues.

[NL_Fer]

Does STR Honda have access to the RedBull/AVL rollin road?

[godlameroso]

I think they have an older unit once used by Red Bull, but this is off topic.

[godlameroso]

The biggest limiting factor for Honda would yet again be the lack of track testing as by their own admission their dynos are not sophisticated enough to replicate the loads and stresses the various components are subjected under the G-forces on track. It is actually not even a secret that the Spec-4 has been on bench testing for months now. This was supposed to debut in Mexico according to Honda's internal timelines but never made it and it is not just because of the divorce rather Honda's lack of confidence in the reliability of the spec despite being on the bench forever. In Preseason testing they will have only Toro Rosso to rely on engine mileage and data collection while all other manufacturers will have three teams each munching miles.

MGU-H have been subjected to premature failures mainly due to cooling issues. Next year each MGU-H has to do 7 races and we still do not know if they have found a permanent and reliable fix as Honda have yet to run an MGU-H for more than two races this season. Alonso ran old PU on Friday in Brazil and a new one from Saturday onwards. The MGU-H is where the technical superiority of Mercedes and Ferrari lies. I agree with the general sentiment that the ICE is no longer the major performance differentiator rather the need for recovering and deploying electrical energy via MGU-H is where Honda lags significantly.

They also had many issues due to manufacturing problems as well.
The dyno problem is more about the transients and inertia simulation that lets them fully simulate the ERS systems i believe. Not G Loading. If you cannot simulate the dynamics of the car on the track then you cannot simulate the ERS response and interplay other than running on track. A big problem when you only have 1 team and reliability issues.

In your opinion do you believe Honda is behind as far as ERS mapping, and extracting the most from the ERS through software? Or is the issue a bit more nuanced?

[amho]

Does anyone knows about relative turbine /compressor size comparison between the F1 manufactures?

[MrPotatoHead]

The biggest limiting factor for Honda would yet again be the lack of track testing as by their own admission their dynos are not sophisticated enough to replicate the loads and stresses the various components are subjected under the G-forces on track. It is actually not even a secret that the Spec-4 has been on bench testing for months now. This was supposed to debut in Mexico according to Honda's internal timelines but never made it and it is not just because of the divorce rather Honda's lack of confidence in the reliability of the spec despite being on the bench forever. In Preseason testing they will have only Toro Rosso to rely on engine mileage and data collection while all other manufacturers will have three teams each munching miles.

MGU-H have been subjected to premature failures mainly due to cooling issues. Next year each MGU-H has to do 7 races and we still do not know if they have found a permanent and reliable fix as Honda have yet to run an MGU-H for more than two races this season. Alonso ran old PU on Friday in Brazil and a new one from Saturday onwards. The MGU-H is where the technical superiority of Mercedes and Ferrari lies. I agree with the general sentiment that the ICE is no longer the major performance differentiator rather the need for recovering and deploying electrical energy via MGU-H is where Honda lags significantly.

They also had many issues due to manufacturing problems as well.
The dyno problem is more about the transients and inertia simulation that lets them fully simulate the ERS systems i believe. Not G Loading. If you cannot simulate the dynamics of the car on the track then you cannot simulate the ERS response and interplay other than running on track. A big problem when you only have 1 team and reliability issues.

In your opinion do you believe Honda is behind as far as ERS mapping, and extracting the most from the ERS through software? Or is the issue a bit more nuanced?

I don't know anymore than most on here about the specifics of the Honda powerplant. My involvement sadly does not let me in on that at this time.
But from what I can see I think it's in thee area of ERS hardware and software. But things are so complex it's really hard to know for sure without being on the inside.

The biggest thing hurting Honda is the lack of testing mileage at this point.
In each of the last 3 years with only 1 team and lack of reliability it's probably halfway through the season before they get to the mileage that the other 3 engine manufacturers had at the end of pre season testing. By which time they have progressed more. That's really hurting them i believe.

[Craigy]

The biggest thing hurting Honda is the lack of testing mileage at this point.
In each of the last 3 years with only 1 team and lack of reliability it's probably halfway through the season before they get to the mileage that the other 3 engine manufacturers had at the end of pre season testing. By which time they have progressed more. That's really hurting them i believe.

Yup.

Km raced so far in 2017 per engine manufacturer:
1. Mercedes 32631
2. Ferrari 29447
3. Renault 18032
4. Honda 8733
5. TAG Heuer 8341 (but this is really a rebadged Renault, obviously).

from http://www.statsf1.com/en/2017/stats.aspx?t=M

So Honda has less than a third of the racing Kms of their closest competitor (Renault, @ 26373 total).