Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[godlameroso]

Is TJI combustion system which injects and ignites fuel in a pre-combustion chamber compitible with the FIA direct injection rules?.

Not exactly, F1 rules only allow 1 injector, I don't know if that means one injector with one spray nozzle with fixed spray pattern. Or if a multi-stage injector is allowed, or if one side mounted injector is spraying both pre and main chambers. We know Honda has the injectors mounted on the exhaust side, the others could be doing something similar. What we don't know is the exact configuration of the injector, spark plug, and the obvious closely guarded secrets like combustion chamber geometry, piston dome geometry etc. The majority of fans don't know or don't care, and the ones that do(most of the people that come here), makes it so that people know they can come here for juicy tech details. Seeing as teams don't want to share that, these things will likely only appear once a concept becomes outdated/obsolete, for the simple fact that it takes substantial economic investment to duplicate.

I was reading Munix post with interest re the point he mentioned "TJI" combustion system, i asked him if he thinks/believe if the said system is compitaible or not with FIA direct injection rules. You chose to answer my question but unfortunatly without answering my question. "is TJI combustion system compitible with FIA direct injection rules?".

Not exactly, F1 rules allow only 1 injector, TJI system was designed with 2 injectors right?

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files ... 2015_o.pdf

I have questions myself, for example, is it legal to have one injector which houses both the spark plug, pre chamber, and it's own spray nozzle and have that same injector have a spray nozzle for the main chamber. If not then no TJI is not compatible, however that doesn't mean they're not using a system based on the principle(that being pre-mixed flame combustion).

[saviour stivala]

That’s a bit better, as you have bothered to respond. re you referring me to here and there, I have followed all you recommended when it happened. I have been involved in the TJI combustion system claim to being used in F1 from the beginning the original pusher pushed this grandee speculation out, that was actually after he first pushed out the use of HCCI, and when on his forum I asked him if he believes a system that requires VVT and more than one injector was compatible with F1 rules, he first went to ANDY COWELL asking if they are using it, and when told no, he came out and said that it was not HCCI that was being used but TJI (his words), when again I asked him if he considers TJI that containing an injector and spark plug in a pre-combustion chamber and injecting and igniting the charge in a pre-combustion chamber was compatible with the direct injection rules, his answer was very simple, I was blocked from on his forum. We are here talking about what is regarded as a top notch F1 technical advisor to a popular broadcaster. My opinion to this day, and that is now some years after Mahle TJI combustion system was pushed out as being used in F1 is still the same as back then, it is not compatible with F1 rules. If a system of similar principle but still starts combustion in a pre-combustion chamber is claimed of being in use, I am still of the opinion that such a system is not compatible with rules.

[henry]

. . . . In developing the PU there are two ways to get more energy from the fuel. Increase the crank power or increase the MGU-H power.

Increasing crank power is the most efficient if all you want to do is extract maximum power from the fuel. However increased crank power is deployed uniformly at every speed. At higher speeds increased crank power is simply eaten up by drag.

Increasing MGU-H power on the other hand allows you the ability to transfer energy to the ES when at high speed and use it at low speed. This is less efficient in absolute terms but more efficient in average speed and hence lap time.

This logic is fine if you take the rule book at face value. OTOH if the ES>H>K energy flow is acceptable and unlimited, the K>H>ES path would likewise be unlimited and allow unlimited conversion of fuel to ES energy - at the highest efficiency.

You are right, I haven’t really done enough thinking using these routes. When it was raised in the Honda context I thought of it as a band aid, helping them overcome an inability to reach 4MJ deployment to the MGU-K.

That gives the PU designers and deployment team yet more trade offs to consider.

Thanks

[henry]

In electric supercharging mode/free load mode the exhaust is byoassing the turbine and that is exactly why technically it is termed free load mode.

Once again you are not correct.

There are images showing wastegates venting the turbine on the periphery of the impeller housing, not before it. I won’t bother to show you any because I have learned that you have immutable opinions. No further discussion required. I only responded in case someone trips over your post and thinks it might be correct.

Good one that henry, you responded to my post on this here discussion forum and said what you had to say, but pronto and tipo spinto declares "no further discussion required".

That’s an interesting use of language there. Don’t try to be too clever or you’ll give the game away.

[saviour stivala]

2. Running "electric supercharger" is a less efficient use of ES energy than sending it to the K - therefore:

In my opinion if the MGU-H is generating at around 70kW they would, at Silverstone, be able to run the K all the time they are at WOT using less than energy from the ES than they can harvest. They would then have a choice, burn less fuel and harvest less or use electric supercharger at the beginning of straights. Or some mix of both.

I don't disagree. The only point I was making is that they would not use electric supercharger unless the K is already motoring at 100%. (This assumes the 4 MJ/lap limit to the K can be circumvented via the devious ES>H>K method).

"4MJ/lap limit to the "K" can be circumvented via ES>H>K method" and gruntguru do you think that the FIA mandated sensor on the "K" that measures flow in and out of the "K" will not register that?. the deployment rules are not made of rubber to be pushed and pulled like they are being done on here, to see how clear the rules are google "FIA 2014 formula one power unit regulations" scroll dowen to power unit energy flow legend engine ERS car, and follow flow chart "K'' deloyment.

[saviour stivala]

Once again you are not correct.

There are images showing wastegates venting the turbine on the periphery of the impeller housing, not before it. I won’t bother to show you any because I have learned that you have immutable opinions. No further discussion required. I only responded in case someone trips over your post and thinks it might be correct.

Good one that henry, you responded to my post on this here discussion forum and said what you had to say, but pronto and tipo spinto declares "no further discussion required".

That’s an interesting use of language there. Don’t try to be too clever or you’ll give the game away.

It doesnt matter, there is nothing hidden, that's the same as "spiritopronto"

[turbof1]

In my opinion if the MGU-H is generating at around 70kW they would, at Silverstone, be able to run the K all the time they are at WOT using less than energy from the ES than they can harvest. They would then have a choice, burn less fuel and harvest less or use electric supercharger at the beginning of straights. Or some mix of both.

I don't disagree. The only point I was making is that they would not use electric supercharger unless the K is already motoring at 100%. (This assumes the 4 MJ/lap limit to the K can be circumvented via the devious ES>H>K method).

"4MJ/lap limit to the "K" can be circumvented via ES>H>K method" and gruntguru do you think that the FIA mandated sensor on the "K" that measures flow in and out of the "K" will not register that?. the deployment rules are not made of rubber to be pushed and pulled like they are being done on here, to see how clear the rules are google "FIA 2014 formula one power unit regulations" scroll dowen to power unit energy flow legend engine ERS car, and follow flow chart "K'' deloyment.

I don't think it is that simple either to circumvent the 4MJ limit on the K, although the same thought has crossed my mind. Nothing in the published rules is theoritically stopping this, but technical directives are probably in place to prevent this.

For the record, Saviour Stivala, the flow chart you refer to does not prevent this. Infact, most of the people here have gone through the technical regulations atleast a few times and definitely have studied that flow chart and can probably draw it by hand by now. However, F1 regulations also come in form of technical directives which we don't get to see. I am sure ES>H>K is prevented somewhere.

Here's btw an interesting headbreaker: the ES can be charged inside the pitbox. Can a fully charged battery, which is very much allowed to be beyond 4MJ, use the ES-H-K route, given the energy was harvested neither by the K or the H?

[saviour stivala]

That official flow chart clearly states "K" deploy >out as "limited". The official FIA energy flow sensor on the "K" measures all flow in and out of the "K".

[saviour stivala]

That official flow chart clearly states "K" deploy >out as "limited". The official FIA energy flow sensor on the "K" measures all flow in and out of the "K".

and another floe seansor on the ES also measure all flow in and out of the ES.

[turbof1]

That official flow chart clearly states "K" deploy >out as "limited". The official FIA energy flow sensor on the "K" measures all flow in and out of the "K".

and another floe seansor on the ES also measure all flow in and out of the ES.

Yes, but there's no wording to prevent ES-H-K 4MJ circumvention in there. What you mention are regulations that determine sensors to measure flow, but there's no actual regulation in that flow chart to prevent the circumvention.

Again, there is probably a technical directive in place that prevents this. What we are discussing here can be classified as symantics, but I do feel it's important to note we as a public do not have all the information. A lot of it is sealed away in TD's.

[godlameroso]

That’s a bit better, as you have bothered to respond. re you referring me to here and there, I have followed all you recommended when it happened. I have been involved in the TJI combustion system claim to being used in F1 from the beginning the original pusher pushed this grandee speculation out, that was actually after he first pushed out the use of HCCI, and when on his forum I asked him if he believes a system that requires VVT and more than one injector was compatible with F1 rules, he first went to ANDY COWELL asking if they are using it, and when told no, he came out and said that it was not HCCI that was being used but TJI (his words), when again I asked him if he considers TJI that containing an injector and spark plug in a pre-combustion chamber and injecting and igniting the charge in a pre-combustion chamber was compatible with the direct injection rules, his answer was very simple, I was blocked from on his forum. We are here talking about what is regarded as a top notch F1 technical advisor to a popular broadcaster. My opinion to this day, and that is now some years after Mahle TJI combustion system was pushed out as being used in F1 is still the same as back then, it is not compatible with F1 rules. If a system of similar principle but still starts combustion in a pre-combustion chamber is claimed of being in use, I am still of the opinion that such a system is not compatible with rules.

That's fair, do you think that there is no type of pre-chamber being used in F1?

What do you think of this bit of the regulations?
5.1.11 An insert within a PU component is a minimal, non-dismountable part whose function is solely to locally support a function of this component. The total volume of inserts within the component cannot be more than 10% of the total volume of the component.

Doesn't this sort of pre-suppose that there's a pre-chamber? If I'm reading this right it's saying that the pre-chamber is limited to 10% of the CC volume?

There's a lot of questions I probably won't get the answers to.

[wuzak]

Here's btw an interesting headbreaker: the ES can be charged inside the pitbox. Can a fully charged battery, which is very much allowed to be beyond 4MJ, use the ES-H-K route, given the energy was harvested neither by the K or the H?

From that flow chart:
"The amount of stored energy in any ES may not be increased whilst the car is stationary in the pit lane or garage during the qualifying Session or a race stop."

[sosic2121]

I don't think it is that simple either to circumvent the 4MJ limit on the K, although the same thought has crossed my mind. Nothing in the published rules is theoritically stopping this, but technical directives are probably in place to prevent this.

I don't think it's possible to stop ES>H>K route.
Both ES>H and H>K are allowed and unlimited. It is expected from H to switch between motoring and generating and between ES and K. So nothing illegal is going on.
I expect that K is also switching between ES and H in order to receive uninterrupted 120kW (unless H has double stator windings )

[Big Tea]

Not exactly, F1 rules only allow 1 injector, I don't know if that means one injector with one spray nozzle with fixed spray pattern. Or if a multi-stage injector is allowed, or if one side mounted injector is spraying both pre and main chambers. We know Honda has the injectors mounted on the exhaust side, the others could be doing something similar. What we don't know is the exact configuration of the injector, spark plug, and the obvious closely guarded secrets like combustion chamber geometry, piston dome geometry etc. The majority of fans don't know or don't care, and the ones that do(most of the people that come here), makes it so that people know they can come here for juicy tech details. Seeing as teams don't want to share that, these things will likely only appear once a concept becomes outdated/obsolete, for the simple fact that it takes substantial economic investment to duplicate.

I was reading Munix post with interest re the point he mentioned "TJI" combustion system, i asked him if he thinks/believe if the said system is compitaible or not with FIA direct injection rules. You chose to answer my question but unfortunatly without answering my question. "is TJI combustion system compitible with FIA direct injection rules?".

Not exactly, F1 rules allow only 1 injector, TJI system was designed with 2 injectors right?

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files ... 2015_o.pdf

I have questions myself, for example, is it legal to have one injector which houses both the spark plug, pre chamber, and it's own spray nozzle and have that same injector have a spray nozzle for the main chamber. If not then no TJI is not compatible, however that doesn't mean they're not using a system based on the principle(that being pre-mixed flame combustion).

Also ( I think ) the rule does not restrict the number of operations of 'one injector' or the 'modes' available.
This is assuming it is possible to get an injector to create a jet and a cloud at critical points in the cycle.

[turbof1]

I don't think it is that simple either to circumvent the 4MJ limit on the K, although the same thought has crossed my mind. Nothing in the published rules is theoritically stopping this, but technical directives are probably in place to prevent this.

I don't think it's possible to stop ES>H>K route.
Both ES>H and H>K are allowed and unlimited. It is expected from H to switch between motoring and generating and between ES and K. So nothing illegal is going on.
I expect that K is also switching between ES and H in order to receive uninterrupted 120kW (unless H has double stator windings )

It's not about stopping it, but about stopping K generated energy allocation being counted as H energy allocation. Else you can deploy a whole lot more energy throughout the lap.

So maybe we should call it K>ES>H>K>driveshaft. Although there are still practical barriers that can make this kinda hard: first of all the K can only store 2MJ each lap. Second is that the minimum and maximum battery charge is not allowed to swing more than 4MJ at any time on track.

Quick example what that means: you have an ES of 8MJ. You started at 4MJ and now currently at 2MJ. Say your MGU-H is disabled and you only store your 2MJ from the mgu-k. Well, you can only do that for 2 laps because after those 2 laps you are at 6MJ (the now maximum charge) and your lowest charge was 2MJ, difference is 4MJ.

Other quick example: Same set up of 8MJ and you start at 4MJ. Assume everything that is generated is stored first on the ES and then consumed and both K and H are sources of energy. In sector one you generate AND use 2MJ, in sector 2 3MJ and use 3MJ, sector 3 you generate 1MJ and use 0.5MJ. Your min. charge is 4MJ and your max charge is 7MJ, so still 1MJ within bounds, yet you used 5.5MJ. In other words your rate of consumption is also a tool to stay within the 4MJ delta.

Some tricky waters to navigate through.