Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[PlatinumZealot]

That's probably for having a "smaller" turbo than Mercedes PU?

That has been sorted years ago.

[saviour stivala]

That's probably for having a "smaller" turbo than Mercedes PU?

That has been sorted years ago.

And still it is not of much help when it comes to powering the ‘K’ when needed most. As per their recent admittance of ‘clipping’ suffering.

[Revs84]

I remember Honda stating quite a few times that it's extremely tricky to find the right balance between achieving ICE efficiency without sacrificing energy recovery too much.

Is it possible that the pursuit towards ICE efficiency has impacted their energy recovery? After all, better efficiency translates to less heat losses, less starting fuel and/or more time on the throttle. Who knows, maybe they might have found that the gains outweigh the energy recovery losses? After all, it is also a balance between different circuits on the calendar.

Then again, I doubt Mercedes's ICE is less efficient than Honda's, so one does wonder about how Mercedes could achieve both, or say, an even better balance.

I know this may sound like a completely stupid question - after all I'm no expert - but does anyone know if it's possible to alter the combustion from race to race in order to produce more recoverable energy through the MGU-H at circuits that have less corners? Would that even make sense?

[63l8qrrfy6]

I remember Honda stating quite a few times that it's extremely tricky to find the right balance between achieving ICE efficiency without sacrificing energy recovery too much.

Is it possible that the pursuit towards ICE efficiency has impacted their energy recovery? After all, better efficiency translates to less heat losses, less starting fuel and/or more time on the throttle. Who knows, maybe they might have found that the gains outweigh the energy recovery losses? After all, it is also a balance between different circuits on the calendar.

Then again, I doubt Mercedes's ICE is less efficient than Honda's, so one does wonder about how Mercedes could achieve both, or say, an even better balance.

I know this may sound like a completely stupid question - after all I'm no expert - but does anyone know if it's possible to alter the combustion from race to race in order to produce more recoverable energy through the MGU-H at circuits that have less corners? Would that even make sense?

Less spark advance will mean that less of the heat released into the cylinder gets converted into piston work and more of it is available to do work on the turbine wheel. A very retarded spark will cause much of the combustion to take place in the exhaust manifold and allow a significant increase in MGUH recovery.

[NL_Fer]

Less corners, longer straights, more time at full throttle, more recovery of exhaust gas energy. I think energy recovery balances itself on power tracks.

At the base it is the combustion, that has to create the crank power and exhaust gasses to be recovered.

[hurril]

I remember Honda stating quite a few times that it's extremely tricky to find the right balance between achieving ICE efficiency without sacrificing energy recovery too much.

Is it possible that the pursuit towards ICE efficiency has impacted their energy recovery? After all, better efficiency translates to less heat losses, less starting fuel and/or more time on the throttle. Who knows, maybe they might have found that the gains outweigh the energy recovery losses? After all, it is also a balance between different circuits on the calendar.

Then again, I doubt Mercedes's ICE is less efficient than Honda's, so one does wonder about how Mercedes could achieve both, or say, an even better balance.

I know this may sound like a completely stupid question - after all I'm no expert - but does anyone know if it's possible to alter the combustion from race to race in order to produce more recoverable energy through the MGU-H at circuits that have less corners? Would that even make sense?

Less spark advance will mean that less of the heat released into the cylinder gets converted into piston work and more of it is available to do work on the turbine wheel. A very retarded spark will cause much of the combustion to take place in the exhaust manifold and allow a significant increase in MGUH recovery.

Plus: you can always drive the MGU-k with the ICE and as far as I understand it, that pathway is more efficient than one that drives the MGU-h via less cylinder work, so to speak. So you'll want to discover the correct fixpoints in those equations and also to bias them in a way that best aligns with current energy generation needs.

[etusch]

Red Bull already informed Max Verstappen during the race that he lost no less than six tenths on the straight at Valtteri Bottas, giving little hope for the rest of the season. But according to Horner, the gap in Sochi is not indicative.

“This circuit is always difficult for us, we have a lot of clipping here and that just has its effect. The picture is somewhat distorted by the [lack of] generation of energy. But we already knew that before we came here, it would always be a challenge. ”

https://nl.motorsport.com/f1/news/check ... content=nl

Yep repeated here.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/christian ... nda-power/

Remember what I said about the MGUK!!

Russia has less braking zones and it affected RedBull.

We also saw in Austria qualifying where Mercedes could release the brake earlier than Max. I am no driver to undstrand what that means but it was something very noticeable.

Said before. I am going with Wazari's insight that their Mercedes MGUK is working under very harsh conditions. Conditions that other manufacturers do not want to push.

Granted the ICE is still where the big money is.. But just saying that MGUK is another area Honda is working on feverishly this year.

Funny how Mercedes avoid starting their engines unnecessarily with the MGUK. Does anyone else see what this means?

Make a guess.

if mercedes engine stops on track it can not be started again.

[etusch]

That's probably for having a "smaller" turbo than Mercedes PU?

That has been sorted years ago.

And still it is not of much help when it comes to powering the ‘K’ when needed most. As per their recent admittance of ‘clipping’ suffering.

Honda made bigger turbo but mercedes went even bigger

[63l8qrrfy6]

Funny how Mercedes avoid starting their engines unnecessarily with the MGUK. Does anyone else see what this means?

Make a guess.

if mercedes engine stops on track it can not be started again.

the anti stall should prevent this from ever happening.

@PZ most likely it means they don't have a zero speed sensor. What do you think it means ?

[nzjrs]

Funny how Mercedes avoid starting their engines unnecessarily with the MGUK. Does anyone else see what this means?

Did you notice if this has changed in recent years / since the PU mode directive?

[Revs84]

I remember Honda stating quite a few times that it's extremely tricky to find the right balance between achieving ICE efficiency without sacrificing energy recovery too much.

Is it possible that the pursuit towards ICE efficiency has impacted their energy recovery? After all, better efficiency translates to less heat losses, less starting fuel and/or more time on the throttle. Who knows, maybe they might have found that the gains outweigh the energy recovery losses? After all, it is also a balance between different circuits on the calendar.

Then again, I doubt Mercedes's ICE is less efficient than Honda's, so one does wonder about how Mercedes could achieve both, or say, an even better balance.

I know this may sound like a completely stupid question - after all I'm no expert - but does anyone know if it's possible to alter the combustion from race to race in order to produce more recoverable energy through the MGU-H at circuits that have less corners? Would that even make sense?

Less spark advance will mean that less of the heat released into the cylinder gets converted into piston work and more of it is available to do work on the turbine wheel. A very retarded spark will cause much of the combustion to take place in the exhaust manifold and allow a significant increase in MGUH recovery.

Plus: you can always drive the MGU-k with the ICE and as far as I understand it, that pathway is more efficient than one that drives the MGU-h via less cylinder work, so to speak. So you'll want to discover the correct fixpoints in those equations and also to bias them in a way that best aligns with current energy generation needs.

If Honda were doing that, then they wouldn't be suffering from clipping due to energy being depleted, no? Since the MGU-K is directly connected, it surely would impact the ICE's output even further when there is no deployable energy I guess?

On the other hand, the MGU-H is powered through gases, hence not connected directly, so I do wonder if slightly retarding the timing as Mudflap suggested could lead to improved energy recovery with minimal impact on power and additional fuel.

After all, how much scope could there possibly be for MGU-K improvements? I'm sure some manufacturers' MGU-K is more efficient than others', but how much of a difference would it really make?

Hence, to me it seems like the biggest differentiator in ERS between Merc and Honda might lie in the energy recovery capabilities from the MGU-H. But I might be completely wrong.

[etusch]

On the other hand, the MGU-H is powered through gases, hence not connected directly, so I do wonder if slightly retarding the timing as Mudflap suggested could lead to improved energy recovery with minimal impact on power and additional fuel.

I think they don't retard firing if they are not at limit of fuel flow. İf you have a bit more fuel Just inject once more at the end of power stroke or during exhaust stroke. How much late additional fuel burned that much heat energy will be gained. if exhaust or mgu-h is hot enough it will help more without sacrificing ice power.

[hurril]

Less spark advance will mean that less of the heat released into the cylinder gets converted into piston work and more of it is available to do work on the turbine wheel. A very retarded spark will cause much of the combustion to take place in the exhaust manifold and allow a significant increase in MGUH recovery.

Plus: you can always drive the MGU-k with the ICE and as far as I understand it, that pathway is more efficient than one that drives the MGU-h via less cylinder work, so to speak. So you'll want to discover the correct fixpoints in those equations and also to bias them in a way that best aligns with current energy generation needs.

If Honda were doing that, then they wouldn't be suffering from clipping due to energy being depleted, no? Since the MGU-K is directly connected, it surely would impact the ICE's output even further when there is no deployable energy I guess?

On the other hand, the MGU-H is powered through gases, hence not connected directly, so I do wonder if slightly retarding the timing as Mudflap suggested could lead to improved energy recovery with minimal impact on power and additional fuel.

After all, how much scope could there possibly be for MGU-K improvements? I'm sure some manufacturers' MGU-K is more efficient than others', but how much of a difference would it really make?

Hence, to me it seems like the biggest differentiator in ERS between Merc and Honda might lie in the energy recovery capabilities from the MGU-H. But I might be completely wrong.

It's not that simple. MGU-h is not free although a portion of its recovery is somewhat. So loading the MGU-h (from generating electricity) will hamper the crank output because of the increased back pressure.

But I agree with you, the MGU-h is the wildcard in some sense. So the more you can tune and build the engine to be a gas generator upstream of the turbine without losing (too much) crank power, the better. But loss of crank power has to be overcome by more than what's gained in turbine output because there are losses involved downstream.

[Marti_EF3]

Plus: you can always drive the MGU-k with the ICE and as far as I understand it, that pathway is more efficient than one that drives the MGU-h via less cylinder work, so to speak. So you'll want to discover the correct fixpoints in those equations and also to bias them in a way that best aligns with current energy generation needs.

If Honda were doing that, then they wouldn't be suffering from clipping due to energy being depleted, no? Since the MGU-K is directly connected, it surely would impact the ICE's output even further when there is no deployable energy I guess?

On the other hand, the MGU-H is powered through gases, hence not connected directly, so I do wonder if slightly retarding the timing as Mudflap suggested could lead to improved energy recovery with minimal impact on power and additional fuel.

After all, how much scope could there possibly be for MGU-K improvements? I'm sure some manufacturers' MGU-K is more efficient than others', but how much of a difference would it really make?

Hence, to me it seems like the biggest differentiator in ERS between Merc and Honda might lie in the energy recovery capabilities from the MGU-H. But I might be completely wrong.

It's not that simple. MGU-h is not free although a portion of its recovery is somewhat. So loading the MGU-h (from generating electricity) will hamper the crank output because of the increased back pressure.

But I agree with you, the MGU-h is the wildcard in some sense. So the more you can tune and build the engine to be a gas generator upstream of the turbine without losing (too much) crank power, the better. But loss of crank power has to be overcome by more than what's gained in turbine output because there are losses involved downstream.

And those "bangs" that the Honda PU does when downshifting and off throttle, may be they are trying to recover from the MGU-H even if they aren't accelerating??

[Winterapfel]

Any idea on why the Mercedes PU is not able to start itself (outside the pitbox, without external starter, contrary to the other PUs) and if/how this is related to a design decision delivering benefit in harvesting or deployment compared to the Honda?