Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[ispano6]

Marko explains why Verstappen suddenly had to go back to the old Honda engine

Prior to the Spanish Grand Prix it was announced that adjustments had been made to Max Verstappen's engine. Helmut Marko explains why the replacement of some parts was necessary by Red Bull Racing.

The new Honda's power unit is in the RB16 since Silverstone, but there were some problems during qualifying on Saturday. As a result the Red Bull mechanics put old components like the internal combustion engine, turbo, MGU-H and MGU-K back in the car.

Marko explains that this was done as a precaution. ""We had a few electronic problems in the data during qualifying, with occasional dropouts. We suspect it has to do with the wiring harness or some sensors. ...and we had to put the old engine in to be on the safe side," says the Red Bull advisor in conversation with Auto, Motor und Sport.

The second engine specification allowed Verstappen to drive with more power over a longer period of time, but that wasn't possible on the Barcelona circuit because of the old parts. It wouldn't have been enough to beat Lewis Hamilton anyway, according to Marko. "We didn't have the pace of Friday and Mercedes gained two to three tenths (compared to the longruns in the second free practice)", concludes Marko.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/65916/ma ... ngine.html

[Revs84]

Marko explains why Verstappen suddenly had to go back to the old Honda engine

Prior to the Spanish Grand Prix it was announced that adjustments had been made to Max Verstappen's engine. Helmut Marko explains why the replacement of some parts was necessary by Red Bull Racing.

The new Honda's power unit is in the RB16 since Silverstone, but there were some problems during qualifying on Saturday. As a result the Red Bull mechanics put old components like the internal combustion engine, turbo, MGU-H and MGU-K back in the car.

Marko explains that this was done as a precaution. ""We had a few electronic problems in the data during qualifying, with occasional dropouts. We suspect it has to do with the wiring harness or some sensors. ...and we had to put the old engine in to be on the safe side," says the Red Bull advisor in conversation with Auto, Motor und Sport.

The second engine specification allowed Verstappen to drive with more power over a longer period of time, but that wasn't possible on the Barcelona circuit because of the old parts. It wouldn't have been enough to beat Lewis Hamilton anyway, according to Marko. "We didn't have the pace of Friday and Mercedes gained two to three tenths (compared to the longruns in the second free practice)", concludes Marko.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/65916/ma ... ngine.html

This is only my theory and I might be completely off, but something tells me that the PU change was done intentionally to save mileage on the 2nd PU.

The changes to the engine mode regulations will be introduced at Spa, which happens to be the next race, and the first in a triple header of back to back power sensitive tracks.

With so many unknowns about the regulations and not knowing what Merc will have in store, they will definitely need every ounce of performance and life from the 2nd PU. Even more so considering that it's time for Merc to roll out the 2nd engine.

If they want to keep the dream of making Verstappen the youngest WDC alive they will need to reduce the chances of grid penalties as much as possible. And be it as it may, the outcome at Spa might well set the tone for the rest of the season seeing that engines are frozen.

Just a theory from my side of course, but one that I see as very plausible. Especially if they had already written off Spain or maybe built some confidence that the old engine would have been enough.

[Big Tea]

Marko explains why Verstappen suddenly had to go back to the old Honda engine

Prior to the Spanish Grand Prix it was announced that adjustments had been made to Max Verstappen's engine. Helmut Marko explains why the replacement of some parts was necessary by Red Bull Racing.

The new Honda's power unit is in the RB16 since Silverstone, but there were some problems during qualifying on Saturday. As a result the Red Bull mechanics put old components like the internal combustion engine, turbo, MGU-H and MGU-K back in the car.

Marko explains that this was done as a precaution. ""We had a few electronic problems in the data during qualifying, with occasional dropouts. We suspect it has to do with the wiring harness or some sensors. ...and we had to put the old engine in to be on the safe side," says the Red Bull advisor in conversation with Auto, Motor und Sport.

The second engine specification allowed Verstappen to drive with more power over a longer period of time, but that wasn't possible on the Barcelona circuit because of the old parts. It wouldn't have been enough to beat Lewis Hamilton anyway, according to Marko. "We didn't have the pace of Friday and Mercedes gained two to three tenths (compared to the longruns in the second free practice)", concludes Marko.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/65916/ma ... ngine.html

This is only my theory and I might be completely off, but something tells me that the PU change was done intentionally to save mileage on the 2nd PU.

The changes to the engine mode regulations will be introduced at Spa, which happens to be the next race, and the first in a triple header of back to back power sensitive tracks.

With so many unknowns about the regulations and not knowing what Merc will have in store, they will definitely need every ounce of performance and life from the 2nd PU. Even more so considering that it's time for Merc to roll out the 2nd engine.

If they want to keep the dream of making Verstappen the youngest WDC alive they will need to reduce the chances of grid penalties as much as possible. And be it as it may, the outcome at Spa might well set the tone for the rest of the season seeing that engines are frozen.

Just a theory from my side of course, but one that I see as very plausible. Especially if they had already written off Spain or maybe built some confidence that the old engine would have been enough.

Quite possible that after fitting the new engine they got back results from the earlier one and decided it ws not as bad as they thought, so, as you say, saved it.

They do tests on things like particles in oil, lost compression etc, but no doubt do not have the same kit trackside as back in the factory

[Craigy]

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/65916/ma ... ngine.html

This is only my theory and I might be completely off, but something tells me that the PU change was done intentionally to save mileage on the 2nd PU.

The changes to the engine mode regulations will be introduced at Spa, which happens to be the next race, and the first in a triple header of back to back power sensitive tracks.

With so many unknowns about the regulations and not knowing what Merc will have in store, they will definitely need every ounce of performance and life from the 2nd PU. Even more so considering that it's time for Merc to roll out the 2nd engine.

If they want to keep the dream of making Verstappen the youngest WDC alive they will need to reduce the chances of grid penalties as much as possible. And be it as it may, the outcome at Spa might well set the tone for the rest of the season seeing that engines are frozen.

Just a theory from my side of course, but one that I see as very plausible. Especially if they had already written off Spain or maybe built some confidence that the old engine would have been enough.

Quite possible that after fitting the new engine they got back results from the earlier one and decided it ws not as bad as they thought, so, as you say, saved it.

They do tests on things like particles in oil, lost compression etc, but no doubt do not have the same kit trackside as back in the factory

Oil testing and compression testing can both be done trackside though.
For compression testing, it's reasonably likely the ICE has those sensors fitted and available all the time, given the nature of the formula.

[Big Tea]

This is only my theory and I might be completely off, but something tells me that the PU change was done intentionally to save mileage on the 2nd PU.

The changes to the engine mode regulations will be introduced at Spa, which happens to be the next race, and the first in a triple header of back to back power sensitive tracks.

With so many unknowns about the regulations and not knowing what Merc will have in store, they will definitely need every ounce of performance and life from the 2nd PU. Even more so considering that it's time for Merc to roll out the 2nd engine.

If they want to keep the dream of making Verstappen the youngest WDC alive they will need to reduce the chances of grid penalties as much as possible. And be it as it may, the outcome at Spa might well set the tone for the rest of the season seeing that engines are frozen.

Just a theory from my side of course, but one that I see as very plausible. Especially if they had already written off Spain or maybe built some confidence that the old engine would have been enough.

Quite possible that after fitting the new engine they got back results from the earlier one and decided it ws not as bad as they thought, so, as you say, saved it.

They do tests on things like particles in oil, lost compression etc, but no doubt do not have the same kit trackside as back in the factory

Oil testing and compression testing can both be done trackside though.
For compression testing, it's reasonably likely the ICE has those sensors fitted and available all the time, given the nature of the formula.

Thats what I said It needs to go back to the bench for 'examination' and stripping where allowed and I think it has to be done under FIA supervision.

[Sieper]

they used the new PU to outqualify the two RacingPoints and then reverted to the older spec PU to save the race mileage. The excuse was some data anomalies which I am sure they will have seen (and likely there always are).

Tanabe was making statements the same as mudflap. qualy mode ban might not be there yet in Spa. They first need to find a good way to actually successfully ban it.

[Farsari]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... uchung-f1/

Something is in the bush. Before the Spanish GP, the FIA ​​warned that after the Belgian GP, ​​only one engine mode may be allowed for qualification and races. All manufacturers were asked to provide details about their ERS systems beforehand. Is it related or is someone suspected of having cheated? T he exact plan of the FIA ​​is still unclear. So far there has only been one letter threatening that possibly only one motor mode will be allowed for qualification and races from the Belgian GP onwards. That would make the hot qualifying rounds with over 1,000 hp history. The world association justifies its plans with the fact that with the complex drive systems it is becoming increasingly difficult to prove whether someone is cheating or not. The Ferrari case has shown the FIA ​​once again that 1,000 engineers are smarter than ten inspectors from the agency.

What exactly the FIA ​​intends to reveal to the teams and engine manufacturers in a technical directive this week. Then it will also be determined whether it will stay at the Belgian GP or the action will be postponed to 2021. What is certain, however, is that all four engine manufacturers will have to upload detailed information about their ERS systems to the FIA ​​server by August 21st. In the technical directive TD / 036-20 of August 4th, it is primarily about the auxiliary circuits of the energy recovery system.

Manipulation of the current measurement?

Apparently the association has a suspicion that one or more of them are not following the rules when it comes to energy management. The FIA ​​Delegate's requests are too specific for a routine investigation. First of all, Ferrari, Honda, Mercedes and Renault are reminded of how energy management is defined in Appendix 3 of the Technical Regulations. One has especially kept an eye on the auxiliary circuits. Two sensors measure the energy flows into and out of the battery and MGU-K. And according to Article 5.2.5, they must transmit the necessary signals to the FIA ​​data logger in order to be able to monitor that the energy flows are compliant with the rules.

Then the warning: Any measure or system invented to intentionally alter the DC electrical measurements to check the rules is considered a serious breach of the regulations. Apparently it still sounds like how Ferrari is said to have tricked the measurement of the gasoline flow rate last year. The signal from the sensor is said to have been manipulated in such a way that more gasoline could be injected than was reported to the FIA ​​measuring device.

The rest of the text of the Technical Directive makes it clear where the FIA ​​suspects possible traps. Namely at the interfaces between the high-voltage network and the auxiliary circuits with less voltage. The connections from the battery to various control units that monitor the ERS system are usually not connected to the high-voltage circuit. And that's exactly where it is obviously possible to disrupt or change the current measurement. That would have the same effect as Ferrari's alleged manipulation of the flow rate measurement. You could feed more power into the system via the MGU-K than the permitted 163 hp.

If necessary, also physical tests

Engine manufacturers must provide information about the ERS architecture by the end of this week. This includes drawings and three-dimensional CAD views of all auxiliary circuits that do not belong to the high-voltage circuit. In addition, insight into the diagrams of the electrical circuits that connect to the high voltage network is required. In addition, the minimum and maximum values ​​of the current that flows in and out of the high-voltage circuit when the car is on the track or is in the garage.

If in doubt, physical checks will be carried out on the car. All engine manufacturers are clearly requested to be available for an investigation. The sudden distrust raises many questions. Either the FIA ​​is actually groping in the dark, or one or more fish with the electric power in gray areas. This suggests that so far none of the four car companies has complained that the rules should be changed in the middle of the season. Normally that would have caused an outcry. However, it is also possible that the FIA ​​uses the investigation of the ERS systems to justify its planned measures in engine modue.

[nzjrs]

they used the new PU to outqualify the two RacingPoints and then reverted to the older spec PU to save the race mileage. The excuse was some data anomalies which I am sure they will have seen (and likely there always are).

I did think something like that too. Qualification position is worth a bit in Spain, and if they do ban qualification modes - effectively running the engine on average a little higher in the race, it makes sense to save the new engine until the new rule is certain to come in or not.

[Revs84]

So far the only development I've read was that the FIA has requested detailed ERS information from all PU manufacturers.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... uchung-f1/

A few days ago, Motorsport.com IT (usual suspects) were implying that Honda were exploiting some loopholes.

I would find that hard to believe given how cautious they always were, but I would not be surprised if all PU manufacturers are exploiting some loopholes to a certain extent.

[Wouter]

So far the only development I've read was that the FIA has requested detailed ERS information from all PU manufacturers.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... uchung-f1/

A few days ago, Motorsport.com IT (usual suspects) were implying that Honda were exploiting some loopholes.

I would find that hard to believe given how cautious they always were, but I would not be surprised if all PU manufacturers are exploiting some loopholes to a certain extent.

Honda? I don't think so.

After the GP Barcelona, Horner asked Toto why Bottas went 1 full second faster at one point in the race
in sector 1 without DRS, but only with ERS.
Toto dismissed the question and started talking about something else.
The same could be seen at Hamilton in rounds 38, 39, 45 and 48.

[Revs84]

Here's the article:

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-fi ... e/4855841/

No particular proof provided in the article. Seems to be based on hearsay.

[HPD]

──Did the Verstappen power unit (PU) come into trouble?

Tanabe TD: The data was abnormal, so I exchanged it just in case. It's not something that was broken, or something like that. It turned out during the qualifying the day before.

──Is the qualifying mode regulation enforced as planned?

Tanabe TD: From the next Round 7 Belgian GP, ​​it has been announced that the qualifying mode will be abolished. It is said that details are under consideration, but Honda has also entered properly and started discussions. I will talk about FIA's regulations, what to monitor, what manufacturers think, "I can do this, but this monitoring is impossible". If the opinions of all the teams and manufacturers are combined, it will be from Belgium. If you can't do that, you can postpone it.

── “It's a bit of a disadvantage for us,” says the Mercedes. How will it affect Honda?

Tanabe TD: It depends on the content of regulations and monitoring. This will change the way in which the impact occurs. If you say that Mercedes will lose, Honda might say "good". But at this point, I'm not sure.

──You said after the qualifying that the difference with Mercedes was wider than when you tested it in February. Did that impression change after the race?

Tanabe TD: Basically, I did only short runs in the test. In other words, it is the difference in speed of one lap. From today's race results, as I said, overtaking is difficult with a comma difference of a few seconds. It is clear that we are losing.

── During the off period from March to July, Mercedes proceeded with further development. Does that mean that the gap has opened up?

Tanabe TD: That's right.

--- Power unit and body?

Tanabe TD: I don't know the proportion, but I think they are both. Working days and growth allowances are simply correlated. "If you work this much for one day, you will make so much progress." That is the normal evolution. Sometimes we fail, but in that case we also recover desperately, so if we cross a certain line we will progress. No teams have been resting since the factory was completely shut down. While the development inclination was maintained for some reason, the inclination of Mercedes was higher than that of us. For that reason, the difference that was originally there opened up. That's what it is.

── I couldn't win one win in the first three games, but I could win one in this three games. In the comparison after the opening game, do you feel that you have caught up with Mercedes a little in this three consecutive games?

Tanabe TD: No. I feel that the difference is not closing. There are still clear differences.

https://www.as-web.jp/f1/613892/2

[63l8qrrfy6]

──Did the Verstappen power unit (PU) come into trouble?
── During the off period from March to July, Mercedes proceeded with further development. Does that mean that the gap has opened up?

Tanabe TD: That's right.

--- Power unit and body?

Tanabe TD: I don't know the proportion, but I think they are both. Working days and growth allowances are simply correlated. "If you work this much for one day, you will make so much progress." That is the normal evolution. Sometimes we fail, but in that case we also recover desperately, so if we cross a certain line we will progress. No teams have been resting since the factory was completely shut down. While the development inclination was maintained for some reason, the inclination of Mercedes was higher than that of us. For that reason, the difference that was originally there opened up. That's what it is.

All UK based team factories have been closed throughout April and May. To claim they have made progress in that period is tosh.

[Wouter]

──Did the Verstappen power unit (PU) come into trouble?
── During the off period from March to July, Mercedes proceeded with further development. Does that mean that the gap has opened up?

Tanabe TD: That's right.

--- Power unit and body?

Tanabe TD: I don't know the proportion, but I think they are both. Working days and growth allowances are simply correlated. "If you work this much for one day, you will make so much progress." That is the normal evolution. Sometimes we fail, but in that case we also recover desperately, so if we cross a certain line we will progress. No teams have been resting since the factory was completely shut down. While the development inclination was maintained for some reason, the inclination of Mercedes was higher than that of us. For that reason, the difference that was originally there opened up. That's what it is.

All UK based team factories have been closed throughout April and May. To claim they have made progress in that period is tosh.

He said: "No teams have been resting since the factory was completely shut down."

Since the end of May, so from June till now.

[63l8qrrfy6]

All UK based team factories have been closed throughout April and May. To claim they have made progress in that period is tosh.

He said: "No teams have been resting since the factory was completely shut down."

Since the end of May, so from June till now.

The question was worded as " During the off period from March to July, Mercedes proceeded with further development..."
I'll put this down to inaccurate translation.