Honda F1 project leader Yusuke Hasegawa has outlined a number of reasons why Honda has been struggling so badly in the beginning of the 2017 Formula One season. He confirmed that lots of problems were not discovered while running on the dynamo meter.
True, because up to now we only have one MG (an MGU-K equivalent). It can become road relevant if the technology is advanced, the cost decrease to install an MGU-H to road cars to further increase efficiency.
Im with craigy, imagine 4kg flywheel of 100000 rpm help ES for stop and go, instead using 50kg of ES, you can use 25kg of it, weight saving. The problem is parasitical loss and bearing problem, as F1 teams face right now. Imagine the hybrid system of MGUH, battery, MGUK, flywheel KERS integrated with MGUH, and pre-chamber ICE create orchestra. I can imagine low noise, high efficiency PU all around in all road condition. Plus the idea to use this PU regulation in all form of racing, hence no development cost is sunk. Todt is genious
Indeed. How about Hasegawa in road car mass production technology transfer? There are 2 things that could improve PU technology, war and racing. Like good old daysNonserviam85 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 13:55True, because up to now we only have one MG (an MGU-K equivalent). It can become road relevant if the technology is advanced, the cost decrease to install an MGU-H to road cars to further increase efficiency.
This argument is also one against using a turbo in the first place. Are turbos road relevant?stevesingo wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 14:44The employment of MGU-H of the type used in F1 in road vehicles is not likely IMO. 99% of road vehicles spend 99% of the time at part throttle. In such a case the amount of heat to be recovered is small.
When we think that an ICE running cira 600Kw is only recovering 60-70kW at WOT or about 10%, imagine what a 100kW could recover; 10-11kW at WOT, 1% of the time. An average family car needs about 25kW to make 100kph/60mph. 10% of that is 250w. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Probably not IMO.
Hybrid goods vehicles, which spend a lot of time at high loads, might be a more attractive proposition. Supplementing KERS which will recover under braking and help on acceleration and on hills.
With regards of lean combustion of pre-chamber technology, it is important to use supercharging. You dont want your 3L engine produce 150 hp in WOT. Since it is spinning anyway, why not integrate your KERS in turbo, apply coupling, done.godlameroso wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 15:27Yes in a twisted sense. Under full boost at WOT the downsized turbo engine burns just as much fuel as the bigger engine it replaces, if not more. The gain is further shrunk as most boosted cars run lower compression, so off boost the performance is worse.
The only place a turbo can make a smaller displacement engine more efficient is cruising at a constant speed with some boost pressure. Stop and go driving, they may burn less fuel simply from being a smaller engine.
The combustion tech being developed here can translate though. As high compression boosted engines that can run super lean would make a big difference in road cars. But the hybrid stuff will only ever be a novelty item until they improve the batteries. Don't get me wrong it's very efficient to use an electric motor for stop and go traffic, but the battery packs are too expensive and too heavy.
I think you're contradicting yourself here. For instance: the Audi TFSI engines run turbos, high compression _and_ SI. You seem to be implying that those engines cannot, even in principle, run some kind of electrical or mechanical compounding. Calling turbos novelty items is most definitely stretching it.godlameroso wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 15:27Yes in a twisted sense. Under full boost at WOT the downsized turbo engine burns just as much fuel as the bigger engine it replaces, if not more. The gain is further shrunk as most boosted cars run lower compression, so off boost the performance is worse.
The only place a turbo can make a smaller displacement engine more efficient is cruising at a constant speed with some boost pressure. Stop and go driving, they may burn less fuel simply from being a smaller engine.
The combustion tech being developed here can translate though. As high compression boosted engines that can run super lean would make a big difference in road cars. But the hybrid stuff will only ever be a novelty item until they improve the batteries. Don't get me wrong it's very efficient to use an electric motor for stop and go traffic, but the battery packs are too expensive and too heavy.
While probably not giving a benefit for KERS, generating small amounts of power from an mgu attached to the turbo should be sufficient to store to use for helping to spool the turbo, or maybe even reduce the load on accessories.stevesingo wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 14:44When we think that an ICE running cira 600Kw is only recovering 60-70kW at WOT or about 10%, imagine what a 100kW could recover; 10-11kW at WOT, 1% of the time. An average family car needs about 25kW to make 100kph/60mph. 10% of that is 250w. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Probably not IMO.
The other 3 are doing better at something, and it may well be that is the ERS, because they aren't using that method.AJI wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 11:12Okay, so now that the Honda method is clear and everyone can agree that Craigy's theory has substance, can we hypothesize that the other 3 are following a similar route and are doing it better, or alternatively that the other 3 have read the article and are laughing their collective asses off, what with Honda being the worst performing PU and all...
I really don't mean any disrespect, I'm just trying to understand if this is what they're all doing.
I'm calling electric cars novelty items not turboshurril wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 16:15I think you're contradicting yourself here. For instance: the Audi TFSI engines run turbos, high compression _and_ SI. You seem to be implying that those engines cannot, even in principle, run some kind of electrical or mechanical compounding. Calling turbos novelty items is most definitely stretching it.godlameroso wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 15:27Yes in a twisted sense. Under full boost at WOT the downsized turbo engine burns just as much fuel as the bigger engine it replaces, if not more. The gain is further shrunk as most boosted cars run lower compression, so off boost the performance is worse.
The only place a turbo can make a smaller displacement engine more efficient is cruising at a constant speed with some boost pressure. Stop and go driving, they may burn less fuel simply from being a smaller engine.
The combustion tech being developed here can translate though. As high compression boosted engines that can run super lean would make a big difference in road cars. But the hybrid stuff will only ever be a novelty item until they improve the batteries. Don't get me wrong it's very efficient to use an electric motor for stop and go traffic, but the battery packs are too expensive and too heavy.
Doing so is probably not financially viable because the gains in fuel consumption is probably negligible compared to those of a truck, for instance. Volvo trucks come with mechanical turbo compounding and I do not think that's just because they want to. Trucks also run most of the time at "part throttle."
also running 10:1 isn't high compression, last boosted s2k I built was on the stock 11:1. I was thinking 13 or 14:1.
I think not. The teams know what the others are doing. Remember this high power electrical cables give off radio signals, the turbines make noise, and the MGUK is quite noisy as well. I bet teams have a decent picture of what the others are doing energy management wise. One of the major things they can't spy on from the track is the combustion process and the physical hardware, that is where Honda and Renault need to catch up.AJI wrote: ↑08 Jan 2018, 11:12Okay, so now that the Honda method is clear and everyone can agree that Craigy's theory has substance, can we hypothesize that the other 3 are following a similar route and are doing it better, or alternatively that the other 3 have read the article and are laughing their collective asses off, what with Honda being the worst performing PU and all...
I really don't mean any disrespect, I'm just trying to understand if this is what they're all doing.
Just an idea, maybe they are trying to get that route of energy recovery banned?
