Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[henry]

1050 - 160 = 890hp from ICE + MGU-H combined. Which means ICE is putting out around 760 - 810 hp on its own, depending on how much the MGU-H is contributing.

Mind you those 1050hp are probably only doable for a handful of straights.

I think you meant to say “ICE + MGU-K“.

I think that in the max power mode the MGU-H is a consumer of power not contributor. The ICE is supercharged with the the compressor driven by the MGU-H (electrical Energy from the ES) and the turbine (kinetic Energy from the exhaust).

Depending on LHV of the fuel this puts the ICE crank power (890hp) at around 50-52% of the energy available in the fuel. Since the compressor is driven in part by an external source this is not the same as the ICE efficiency.

No, the MGU-H does contribute. Powering the turbo takes energy from the crankshaft. Remember that the turbine is an obstruction at the end of the exhaust runners. That obstruction creates backpressure adding pumping losses to the crankshaft. Those pumping losses are working against the crankshaft robbing it of power. By removing that pumping loss with the MGU-H, the power lost driving the turbine returns to the crankshaft.

A belt driven super charger and exhaust gas driver super charger both impart a parasitic load on the engine reducing it's true potential. There's no such thing as a free lunch in physics. Using the power of the MGU-H reduces this parasitic drag, therefore we can think of the MGU-H as adding power to the crankshaft, just not directly. Because it's not direct there's some inefficiency in the energy conversion, so 100hp from the MGU-H doesn't necessarily equal to 100hp extra at the crank. You can get closer if you improve the efficiency in your energy conversion, IE the MGU-H can add more power to the crank if you have a less efficient turbine that robs the engine of more power in all circumstances.

OK, I think I understand you. Some of the power consumed by the MGU-H does contribute to the crank power, it’s an interesting question as to how much contribution it makes.

In your description of the what happens in max power (supercharge) mode I think you’re saying that the MGU-H motors the turbine and so reduces exhaust back pressure. I don’t think that’s the case. The back pressure is reduced by opening the wastegate and the turbine continues to drive the compressor using kinetic energy from blowdown but at a reduced power. The shortfall Is made up by the MGU-H also driving the compressor. I think the shortfall is around 80kW. Because of the reduced back pressure the ICE output goes up by maybe 30 or 40kW. I think your argument is that the MGU-H is providing 80kW even though the crank power only goes up 40kW.

An interesting way of looking at it, although your ICE+MGU-H equation only works for an ICE power level that can never exist.

[Jaisonas]

Gasly seems to have suffered the same engine issue Max had in race 1 Austria. Same engine behavior with the electronics

[godlameroso]

He just took on a new power unit.

[saviour stivala]

Gasly seems to have suffered the same engine issue Max had in race 1 Austria. Same engine behavior with the electronics

Gasly took his second control electronics.
So far before the third race.
Williams 63. 2 ICE. 2 TC. 2 MGU-H.
Haas 20. 2 ES. 2 CE.
Alfa Romeo 99 2 CE.
Alpha Tauri 10. 2 CE.
Red Bull 23. 2 CE.

[Jaisonas]

Which just blew up ...

[patient1223]

Driveshaft failure.

[Marti_EF3]

Driveshaft failure.

RB15 had same problems last year

[bigblue]

Today we had a drivetrain issue and since the beginning of the race I had problems with gear shifts which we tried to fix on track but we couldn’t, so we just had to retire the car.

https://en.hondaracingf1.com/races/2020 ... racereview

[ispano6]

Today we had a drivetrain issue and since the beginning of the race I had problems with gear shifts which we tried to fix on track but we couldn’t, so we just had to retire the car.

https://en.hondaracingf1.com/races/2020 ... racereview

Driveshaft failure.

RB15 had same problems last year

Not driveshaft, not drivetrain, but gearbox again.

"but unfortunately Pierre’s race had ended a few laps earlier when he came into the pits and retired due to a gearbox issue".

[Craigy]

"but unfortunately Pierre’s race had ended a few laps earlier when he came into the pits and retired due to a gearbox issue".

When I did the RBR factory tour a few years ago, the guide mentioned that all the gearbox internals for both the Redbull Racing and the Scuderia Toro Rosso (as it was at the time) cars were manufactured in-house at MK. We walked around one of the machining buildings (full of CNC mills) -- they were doing everything onsite from billets of raw material, under the company name of "Rebull Technologies".

They do also have quite a bit of onsite dyno kit for things like whole rear-ends of cars, single corners of cars, whole chassis, etc. Practically the only thing they don't do onsite is the physical wind tunnel -- that's still up the road on an ex-MOD site at Twinwoods Business Park near Thurleigh. They make the models in MK and drive them up to that tunnel for runs.

I wonder if the same manufacturing ethos still applies -- I suspect it probably does. It's certainly the case that Redbull are still expanding in MK -- they have enough of the buildings on the same industrial park now to have gained permission to gate the whole thing off and call it a campus; I drove past it a few weeks ago and some of the non-redbull buildings there are now being demolished to make way for it.

Given that they design the box and manufacture all of it in-house from scratch, it's surprising it has failed at all, but I'm sure they'll get to the bottom of what's happening.

[ispano6]

"but unfortunately Pierre’s race had ended a few laps earlier when he came into the pits and retired due to a gearbox issue".

When I did the RBR factory tour a few years ago, the guide mentioned that all the gearbox internals for both the Redbull Racing and the Scuderia Toro Rosso (as it was at the time) cars were manufactured in-house at MK. We walked around one of the machining buildings (full of CNC mills) -- they were doing everything onsite from billets of raw material, under the company name of "Rebull Technologies".

They do also have quite a bit of onsite dyno kit for things like whole rear-ends of cars, single corners of cars, whole chassis, etc. Practically the only thing they don't do onsite is the physical wind tunnel -- that's still up the road on an ex-MOD site at Twinwoods Business Park near Thurleigh. They make the models in MK and drive them up to that tunnel for runs.

I wonder if the same manufacturing ethos still applies -- I suspect it probably does. It's certainly the case that Redbull are still expanding in MK -- they have enough of the buildings on the same industrial park now to have gained permission to gate the whole thing off and call it a campus; I drove past it a few weeks ago and some of the non-redbull buildings there are now being demolished to make way for it.

Given that they design the box and manufacture all of it in-house from scratch, it's surprising it has failed at all, but I'm sure they'll get to the bottom of what's happening.

Last year's RB15 gearbox is probably bulletproof. But I would have thought that the AT01 inherited that box. Tanabe said that Pierre’s PU seemed to not have suffered issues but would check it. Maybe AT were trying something new and Pierre’s car was the guinea pig. What parts within the gearbox aren't subject to homologation and can be developed throughout the year? The diff perhaps? Components relating to the MGUK? What would cook a gearbox and be a known issue all weekend and still be allowed to run to the point of failure? Sounds like real world testing and probably worth good data.

Which brings up the loophole that Racing Point and Alpha Tauri using 2019 gearboxes are allowed with 2020 gearbox upgrades without having to spend tokens. While they won't have the 2021 customer gearboxes, they effectively should have more tokens to spend for other development. Red Bull and Honda are probably in the process of maximizing both team's development to fast track work that AT and RB could split between the two.

https://sports.yahoo.com/loophole-allow ... 04650.html

[Craigy]

Article 9.5.2 of the 2020 technical regs says this:
In this context the following parts are not considered part of the gearbox and may be
changed without incurring a penalty under the F1 Sporting Regulations. If changing any of
these parts involves breaking an FIA applied seal this may be done but must be carried out
under FIA supervision :
a. The clutch assembly and the power unit output shaft, provided this is located prior to
any mechanical speed reduction from the engine.
b. The clutch actuator and clutch release bearing(s).
c. Inboard driveshaft joints and seals but not their housing if that housing is integral
with the gearbox output shaft and therefore part of the sprung mass.
d. The hydraulic system prior to the point at which it produces direct mechanical
movement of the gear selection mechanism by means of hydraulic actuator(s).
e. Oil, oil pumps, oil filters, oil seals, oil coolers and any associated hoses or pipes.
f. Electrical sensors, actuators, servo valves and wiring.
g. Any parts associated with the suspension or functioning of the sprung suspension that
are attached to the gearbox casing.
h. The rear impact structure provided it can be separated from any gearbox casing.
i. Any other component mounted to the casing whose primary purpose is unconnected
with the transmission of power or selection of gears.

Article 22 of the technical regs deals with the 2020 to 2021 homologation limits. I had not appreciated how stringent those limits were..

Under the sporting regs, 23.5d and e applies:
d) Change gears and dog rings (excluding final drives or reduction gears) may be changed
under supervision for others of identical specification at any time during an Event
provided the FIA technical delegate is satisfied there is evident physical damage to the
parts in question and that such changes are not being carried out on a systematic basis.

e) Other than under d) above, a replacement gearbox will also be deemed to have been used
if any of the FIA seals are damaged or removed from the original gearbox after it has been
used for the first time.

[ispano6]

Honda not satisfied yet: "We're working very hard.
Tanabe:
"We have come close to the top engines over the years, we are still looking for something in our development and we have found it, but also they, the competition works and we never stop and are never satisfied with our level of technology. More things are coming"

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/65496/ho ... ming-.html

[Revs84]

Any insight as to why Albon got a new TC and MGU-H this weekend? I didn't watch FP1/2 - did he have any failures?

This puts him on his 3rd component for each already, which is quite early considering we're only at the 6th race

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/65650/co ... parts.html

[saviour stivala]

I think you meant to say “ICE + MGU-K“.

I think that in the max power mode the MGU-H is a consumer of power not contributor. The ICE is supercharged with the the compressor driven by the MGU-H (electrical Energy from the ES) and the turbine (kinetic Energy from the exhaust).

Depending on LHV of the fuel this puts the ICE crank power (890hp) at around 50-52% of the energy available in the fuel. Since the compressor is driven in part by an external source this is not the same as the ICE efficiency.

No, the MGU-H does contribute. Powering the turbo takes energy from the crankshaft. Remember that the turbine is an obstruction at the end of the exhaust runners. That obstruction creates backpressure adding pumping losses to the crankshaft. Those pumping losses are working against the crankshaft robbing it of power. By removing that pumping loss with the MGU-H, the power lost driving the turbine returns to the crankshaft.

A belt driven super charger and exhaust gas driver super charger both impart a parasitic load on the engine reducing it's true potential. There's no such thing as a free lunch in physics. Using the power of the MGU-H reduces this parasitic drag, therefore we can think of the MGU-H as adding power to the crankshaft, just not directly. Because it's not direct there's some inefficiency in the energy conversion, so 100hp from the MGU-H doesn't necessarily equal to 100hp extra at the crank. You can get closer if you improve the efficiency in your energy conversion, IE the MGU-H can add more power to the crank if you have a less efficient turbine that robs the engine of more power in all circumstances.

OK, I think I understand you. Some of the power consumed by the MGU-H does contribute to the crank power, it’s an interesting question as to how much contribution it makes.

In your description of the what happens in max power (supercharge) mode I think you’re saying that the MGU-H motors the turbine and so reduces exhaust back pressure. I don’t think that’s the case. The back pressure is reduced by opening the wastegate and the turbine continues to drive the compressor using kinetic energy from blowdown but at a reduced power. The shortfall Is made up by the MGU-H also driving the compressor. I think the shortfall is around 80kW. Because of the reduced back pressure the ICE output goes up by maybe 30 or 40kW. I think your argument is that the MGU-H is providing 80kW even though the crank power only goes up 40kW.

An interesting way of looking at it, although your ICE+MGU-H equation only works for an ICE power level that can never exist.

In a turbo-supercharger installation, all cylinders exhaust into a common collector with two exit paths; one through a variable opening waste-gate, and the other through nozzles aimed at a turbine wheel. With the waste-gate fully open, there is no restriction, and collector pressure is nearly atmospheric. However, as the waste-gate is closed, pressure builds up in the collector. The gas is forced through the nozzle, turning a turbine, which drives a supercharger. No power recovery is possible in such a system unless the exhaust collector is above existing atmospheric pressure.