Power output limited formula

[Xwang]

Hi,
I would like to know if , according to you it is possible to police an hypothetical formula in which the power of gearbox output/drive shafts is limited to a maximum instead of fuel consumption.
I suppose a reliable and precise torque sensor is needed so that to compute at runtime the power knowing the angular velocity of the gearbox output/drive shafts.
If it is possible it should then be possible to punish the car who exceeds the power limit in a similar way as the current fuel flow limit rules and at the same time more freedom can be given to the engine manufacturer because different kind of engines are levelled by this max power output rule (of course the more efficient one still can run with less fuel weight but with less advantage).
What do you think about it?

[Just_a_fan]

One question: why?

[63l8qrrfy6]

There already is a company called Torquemeters that makes such sensors for F1 teams (mostly for dynos and rigs as far as I am aware). But yes, it can definitely be done.

I also need to ask why ?

[Xwang]

Because it seems a better Balance Of Performance (at least as far as engine is related) than semi-empirical/theoretical factors used to compare different kinds of engines (gasoline/diesel/hybrid in WEC).
If so a lot of restrictions related to power units could be removed and an open engine formula could be instantiated.

[Tommy Cookers]

and similarly limit the 'downforce' ? - (total contact DF not just aero DF )

[Jolle]

Because it seems a better Balance Of Performance (at least as far as engine is related) than semi-empirical/theoretical factors used to compare different kinds of engines (gasoline/diesel/hybrid in WEC).
If so a lot of restrictions related to power units could be removed and an open engine formula could be instantiated.

A balance of performance is something for club races and semi spec series, not formula one, that challenges constructors to make the most of the formula.

[Just_a_fan]

If people want equal power and equal downforce then F1 has to become a single make series. That'll be Ferrari, RedBull, Mercedes, Renault, Honda out then...

[roon]

Because it seems a better Balance Of Performance (at least as far as engine is related) than semi-empirical/theoretical factors used to compare different kinds of engines (gasoline/diesel/hybrid in WEC).
If so a lot of restrictions related to power units could be removed and an open engine formula could be instantiated.

I think it would work. Development would involve engine weight & volume, fuel weight & volume, and various powertrain technologies. Many ways to achieve, say, 1000 hp. Much would depend on how open the formula is.

A high rpm NA petrol engine would be one familiar and potentially very lightweight path.
A high rpm diesel might permit a smaller fuel tank.
Electric motors are compact and reliable, but powering them them in a mass efficient way is a challenge.
Batteries remain heavy, series hybrids might be investigated.
Gaseous or cryo fuels would pose a packaging challenge but could provide better combustion properties.
Beamed power or trackside electrical contacts may need to be specifically outlawed i.e. all energy used must be stored within the vehicle.
Wankels and 2-strokes may see a return.

[Xwang]

Because it seems a better Balance Of Performance (at least as far as engine is related) than semi-empirical/theoretical factors used to compare different kinds of engines (gasoline/diesel/hybrid in WEC).
If so a lot of restrictions related to power units could be removed and an open engine formula could be instantiated.

I think it would work. Development would involve engine weight & volume, fuel weight & volume, and various powertrain technologies. Many ways to achieve, say, 1000 hp. Much would depend on how open the formula is.

A high rpm NA petrol engine would be one familiar and potentially very lightweight path.
A high rpm diesel might permit a smaller fuel tank.
Electric motors are compact and reliable, but powering them them in a mass efficient way is a challenge.
Batteries remain heavy, series hybrids might be investigated.
Gaseous or cryo fuels would pose a packaging challenge but could provide better combustion properties.
Beamed power or trackside electrical contacts may need to be specifically outlawed i.e. all energy used must be stored within the vehicle.
Wankels and 2-strokes may see a return.

It was exactly what I was thinking to.
And moreover it seems more enforceable than other silly proposals like budget caps (which according to me is completely wrong and impossible to enforce).

[roon]

If the current aero and chassis formula remained, and only the engine rules were relaxed, I think we would see a return to NA 4 stroke engines. Likely a vee engine for structure and size, likely small displacement and high operating speed. This is what the engine suppliers are familiar with. In 2005 BMW were making an 82kg V10 with over 900 hp. There is a lot of potential yet with mechanisms and materials.

Exotic engines and systems could be developed, but the immediate, affordable goal, I think, would be something like the above.

[factory_p]

There already is a company called Torquemeters that makes such sensors for F1 teams (mostly for dynos and rigs as far as I am aware). But yes, it can definitely be done.

Trouble is : these sensors are far from being precise and repeatable enough to be used as a control value in any regulation. The FIA is very keen on improving these sensors so that one day they could be implemented in spec series such as F2/F3 and used to monitor engine performance equity, but as of now it's impossible.

[Tommy Cookers]

Trouble is : these sensors are far from being precise and repeatable enough to be used as a control value in any regulation. The FIA is very keen on improving these sensors so that one day they could be implemented in spec series such as F2/F3 and used to monitor engine performance equity, but as of now it's impossible.

the sensors are in principle just fine at sensing the PU torque in the output shaft
but the torque in the output shaft is constantly varying eg as the track is a series of discontinuities in reaction load aka bumps
so the validity of the result depends on the properties of some averaging method
ie the metering process is not necessarily immune to deliberate or accidental aliasing effects
(of course the same applies to so-called downforce limiting)

no meter can perform beyond limitations that ideally should be accounted for and complied with in use
that's why the fuel rate is mandated only at a point where load conditions are relatively benign

[wuzak]

If the current aero and chassis formula remained, and only the engine rules were relaxed, I think we would see a return to NA 4 stroke engines. Likely a vee engine for structure and size, likely small displacement and high operating speed. This is what the engine suppliers are familiar with. In 2005 BMW were making an 82kg V10 with over 900 hp. There is a lot of potential yet with mechanisms and materials.

Exotic engines and systems could be developed, but the immediate, affordable goal, I think, would be something like the above.

I think if the engine rules were relaxed but chassis rules remained the same that it would be unlikely that high rpm N/A 4 stroke engines would return.

Mainly because there is no weight saving in the car (minimum weight being part of the chassis formula), and you would use more fuel.

To get 900hp+, a 3l V10 used roughly 200kg/hr fuel, compared to 100kg/hr under the current regulations.

If the weight limit was reduced you would likely see a V6 turbo, single or twin, or an L4 turbo. With restrictions lifted on the engine rules you would make substantially more power with that setup, considering that they could use a lot of the tricks they have learned in the current hybrids on those. To replace the MGUH they would develop anti-lag systems.

An all up weight of such a V6 turbo ought not be too much heavier than the V10, given the same life expectancy (be that 1 race weekend, as in 2005, or 7).

The turbo engine could run 50% more fuel flow than now and still be substantially less than for the V10, while making considerably more power.

A V6T with 150kg/hr fuel flow, using knowledge from today's V6Ts, could make 1,100 - 1,200hp, or more.

Why does fuel flow matter?

If the races have no refueling, the turbo cars can start lighter, which is an advantage. If there is refueling, the advantage is quicker stops.

[Jolle]

As far as I know, in every racing series where you can choose your engine configuration, the constructors go for a turbo engine. The only big series with a NA engine, are where they are mandatory.

[Xwang]

As far as I know, in every racing series where you can choose your engine configuration, the constructors go for a turbo engine. The only big series with a NA engine, are where they are mandatory.

Maybe, but with a power output limit you could have different engine displacements and configurations like in the WEC even though all turbo engines.
This could give use some championship variability because different power units from different manufactures might be more or less performant with respect to rivals changing from one track to the other* (as happened when in F1 there where v8, v10 and v12) then they could also converge, but meantime we as fans would have a lot to speak about IMHO.

* better if track which requires diffrent cars characteristics will be mixed in the championship, but it is another aspect that I hope FIA and F1 will address in the future.