the 'hp contribution' of a tuned induction system is the most valuable kind of hp ......
the electrical kind
anything that cuts compressor work is contributing in this way eg reduced constraint in induction system
Aren't typical wind speed measurements typically taken at a much higher elevation than what an F1 car runs in (maybe something like 10m in elevation). A ~1m max height of an F1 car is probably running in a significant boundary layer and could see quite a bit lower wind speed than that measured at an airport. The interesting geometry around the track in Singapore will also make it quite difficult to get a reliable wind speed data. A big open track like Silverstone would probably be better to use IMO, or perhaps Austria or Spa since the significant elevation changes would provide another data point.henry wrote: ↑20 Mar 2018, 19:18A further thought.
The Cd figures I arrived at seemed low in relation to Prof Limebeers, which were for narrower cars and tyres.
I looked at the effect of wind speed. In September in Singapore the wind speed and direction is fairly stable averaging 6 knots tailwind down straight 1. I used the numbers for Changi airport.
Adding this to my calcs brought the Cd figures to 0.9 low speed and 0.8 high speed, which seem more reasonable. The DRS would be open which would lower them slightly when comparing with the Prof.
Now I can put this idea to rest.johnny comelately wrote: ↑19 Mar 2018, 13:43Have posted elsewhere regarding the smoky engines, but no opinions, which might indicate that it is an incorrect idea,but:
They could be running NO oil rings?
advantage is less friction
possible with pressure difference control
seem to be only smoky when idle or after idle which could relate to throttling
Some good points.Cold Fussion wrote: ↑29 Mar 2018, 08:35Aren't typical wind speed measurements typically taken at a much higher elevation than what an F1 car runs in (maybe something like 10m in elevation). A ~1m max height of an F1 car is probably running in a significant boundary layer and could see quite a bit lower wind speed than that measured at an airport. The interesting geometry around the track in Singapore will also make it quite difficult to get a reliable wind speed data. A big open track like Silverstone would probably be better to use IMO, or perhaps Austria or Spa since the significant elevation changes would provide another data point.henry wrote: ↑20 Mar 2018, 19:18A further thought.
The Cd figures I arrived at seemed low in relation to Prof Limebeers, which were for narrower cars and tyres.
I looked at the effect of wind speed. In September in Singapore the wind speed and direction is fairly stable averaging 6 knots tailwind down straight 1. I used the numbers for Changi airport.
Adding this to my calcs brought the Cd figures to 0.9 low speed and 0.8 high speed, which seem more reasonable. The DRS would be open which would lower them slightly when comparing with the Prof.
Very high, very high flame temps. It's almost like a turbine engine these engines need so much air for cooling, without huge amounts of air dilution the pistons will melt.johnny comelately wrote: ↑29 Mar 2018, 14:04Clarity request.
Could posters say what they think is the :
1. Lambda, steady state.
2. Lambda, transition.
3. BSFC.
4. Power of the ICE.
5. NOx emissions. (even just high or low)
Lambda is likely anywhere between 1.1-1.5 steady state, depending on engine map. You should know better than anyone what lambda is like in transition state. It's obvious with a smaller volume the flame chamber needs less fuel to have a relatively rich mixture. If I had to guess I'd say it's probably quite conventional .8 .7 in there, although if you're new to the concept you'll likely have to go even richer than that in both transition and steady state to avoid combustion instability. The more fleshed out your concept, and the more precise the process the more you can push things.godlameroso wrote: ↑30 Mar 2018, 03:44Very high, very high flame temps. It's almost like a turbine engine these engines need so much air for cooling, without huge amounts of air dilution the pistons will melt.johnny comelately wrote: ↑29 Mar 2018, 14:04Clarity request.
Could posters say what they think is the :
1. Lambda, steady state.
2. Lambda, transition.
3. BSFC.
4. Power of the ICE.
5. NOx emissions. (even just high or low)
I don’t know the answers to these. I do have a feel for overall PU power (675 kw) from the look I took at the Ferrari Singapore data, it only depends on about 7 or 8 assumptions , but I have no idea how much is ICE, how much MGU-H and how much ES. I assumed the PU was in self sustain plus mode, assumption 1.johnny comelately wrote: ↑29 Mar 2018, 14:04Clarity request.
Could posters say what they think is the :
1. Lambda, steady state.
2. Lambda, transition.
3. BSFC.
4. Power of the ICE.
5. NOx emissions. (even just high or low)
I can see their point in not wanting to fight on 2 fronts, that of developing and of designing the new unit, but if there is a single factor that would encourage a new builder in it is having a running start on the old guard, with them in the same boat with testing. Even more so if the new engine is 'simplified' and easier to understand and get up to speed.bauc wrote: ↑29 Mar 2018, 11:11Renault calls for F1 engine freeze in 2019-20
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... 0-1020042/
I think their stance has merit. This would allow Honda to catch up and it would allow all engine manufactures to have 2 years of development of the next gen PU, which can ensure that all manufactures will be able to invest in proper R&D
1. 1.2-2.0johnny comelately wrote: ↑29 Mar 2018, 14:04Clarity request.
Could posters say what they think is the :
1. Lambda, steady state.
2. Lambda, transition.
3. BSFC.
4. Power of the ICE.
5. NOx emissions. (even just high or low)