2021 Engine thread

[second]

I would love to see an engine formula which is:

- 2.4 litre v8 twin turbo
- unlimited energy recovery
- unlimited fuel flow
- refueling formula is back
- no restrictions on engine development

Which leads to cars without any ERS system because just lug around more fuel and skip the conversion inefficiencies. Nobody cares but I would stop watching. It would relegate F1 to things like drag racing in mud and truck hill climbs. Both awesome shows of power but really nothing at all that interesting.

I don't really understand this mindset. If f1 stopped using ERS you would stop watching? The ERS is the only thing you like about F1? This a complete mystery to me. There are people who probably would rather die than see F1 go full electric and then there are people who would not watch it unless the cars carry heavy batteries and electric motors around the track.

I'd much rather see an engine package being chosen that is actually the fastest way around the track. That today and for the next 5 years is turbo petrol engine. Adding any kind of harvesting just adds weight which the system in itself can't compensate with its positives. According to racecarengineering 2013 (the engine special issue) these facts were stated:

V8 weight: 100kg (95 without theMGU). With ancillaries 120kg.
V6 turbo+electrical parts weight: 180kg. With ancillaries: 200kg. 145kg for the ice alone. + the additional cooling.

There is no doubt that a little bigger petrol turbo engine (1,8 or 2 litres) with higher fuel flow limit to get similar peak power as the current peak would run around the current ERS cars. Increase weight to 160kg and take 40kg more fuel onboard and stay at the same weight. Cheaper, faster and would sound better too. More physical to drive and full power available at all times and not when the computer thinks you are permitted to have it.

Why is it worth it to be at the cutting edge of technology if it makes you slower? What is it about the ERS that makes it so important to you? The way I look at it it doesn't add anything positive to f1. It does make the sport look deceivingly developed but when you look at the numbers you'll only find nobody would use it unless it was forced. Yet for some people it is so important aspect of f1 that they'd rather not watch it if it was removed...

[gruntguru]

Why is it worth it to be at the cutting edge of technology if it makes you slower?

1. The cars are not "slower".
2. The power to weight ratio is artificially governed by the regulations - not by the fact that the formula is "at the cutting edge of technology". A flick of the pen could easily increase the power by 50%.

[godlameroso]

According to racecarengineering 2013 (the engine special issue) these facts were stated:

V8 weight: 100kg (95 without theMGU). With ancillaries 120kg.
V6 turbo+electrical parts weight: 180kg. With ancillaries: 200kg. 145kg for the ice alone. + the additional cooling.

5.4.1 The overall weight of the power unit must be a minimum of 145kg.

Isn't the entire system known as the power unit?

At least it is according to this definition:

1.22 Power unit :
The internal combustion engine, complete with its ancillaries, any energy recovery system and all actuation systems necessary to make them function at all times.

[Cold Fussion]

Given that the minimum weight in 2013 was 640kg, and 702kg in 2014, it bares to reason the hybrid PU is 60kg heavier than the old V8 ICE.

[ringo]

Might as well we have gas turbines that power electrical motors. lol

For me i would get rid of the turbo and excessive electrical integration. a nice V10 or V12 with an ERS similar to the La Ferrari with TJI is all that would be needed . I would enjoy it a lot more than what we have now.
Also 4 wheel KERS, without the ability to drive the front wheels with the KERS. Throw in refueling and i would be content.

Nowadays i don't even take notice of the sound of the engines, little quips over the team radio seem like the bulk of the entertainment these days in the noise department.

[Cold Fussion]

I think it would be interesting to have a very open engine regulations with the rules being a power limit, race fuel allowance and mandated RWD (with front axle harvesting if they wish).

[hurril]

I would love to see an engine formula which is:

- 2.4 litre v8 twin turbo
- unlimited energy recovery
- unlimited fuel flow
- refueling formula is back
- no restrictions on engine development

Which leads to cars without any ERS system because just lug around more fuel and skip the conversion inefficiencies. Nobody cares but I would stop watching. It would relegate F1 to things like drag racing in mud and truck hill climbs. Both awesome shows of power but really nothing at all that interesting.

I don't really understand this mindset. If f1 stopped using ERS you would stop watching? The ERS is the only thing you like about F1? This a complete mystery to me. There are people who probably would rather die than see F1 go full electric and then there are people who would not watch it unless the cars carry heavy batteries and electric motors around the track.

I'd much rather see an engine package being chosen that is actually the fastest way around the track. That today and for the next 5 years is turbo petrol engine. Adding any kind of harvesting just adds weight which the system in itself can't compensate with its positives. According to racecarengineering 2013 (the engine special issue) these facts were stated:

V8 weight: 100kg (95 without theMGU). With ancillaries 120kg.
V6 turbo+electrical parts weight: 180kg. With ancillaries: 200kg. 145kg for the ice alone. + the additional cooling.

There is no doubt that a little bigger petrol turbo engine (1,8 or 2 litres) with higher fuel flow limit to get similar peak power as the current peak would run around the current ERS cars. Increase weight to 160kg and take 40kg more fuel onboard and stay at the same weight. Cheaper, faster and would sound better too. More physical to drive and full power available at all times and not when the computer thinks you are permitted to have it.

Why is it worth it to be at the cutting edge of technology if it makes you slower? What is it about the ERS that makes it so important to you? The way I look at it it doesn't add anything positive to f1. It does make the sport look deceivingly developed but when you look at the numbers you'll only find nobody would use it unless it was forced. Yet for some people it is so important aspect of f1 that they'd rather not watch it if it was removed...

Don't read into my opinion that I would throw a hissy fit should I not get to have it my way I simply did not find the previous eras very interesting (with a few exceptions.) Part of what I like about this formula is that there is a pretty large development potential in the cars as has been seen. Compare the ~700 peak hp of the 2014 Renault with the currently suggested 900+ for the Mercs.

The cars aren't made slower by the current formula, only when compared to the one you imply in your text here. You could make the current one faster rather easily as well - just raise the fuel flow limit. (I am not against that.)

I just happen to like the cutting-edgeness of what we have now, I also really like turbos and energy recovery systems. They fascinate me. So as you can see, I have no problem at all keeping personal preferences and some misplaced sense of what would be best for the sport apart.

And about the sound. The V12 and V10 era sure had a terrific sound. I mean it! I regularly youtube that. But there's no bringing that back. Some other random straight-turbo-formula is not that interesting either (to me); I don't watch IndyCar at all for instance. Do you?

[Andres125sx]

Jolle:
loudest on the grid doesn't make you faster.... noise=waste

I know but I am old school and love F1 with lots of noise [-o< [-o<

It would make as much sense as the "engine noise generator" in the latest M5. Or a card between the spokes of your bike. Or a microphone for the driver so he can make engine noises himself

I like the last option, it would provide unique sound to each car

[Andres125sx]

About 2021 engine, I´m sure they will be similar to current ones, but with the ICE reduced and bigger ERS

I don´t think F1 can be fully electric in 2021, I´d love it, but I think FE will still be below GP2 perfomance. F1 is a far contender for FE yet, matching F1 power with fully electric power is doable today, but matching race lenght using that power is decades far I´m afraid

[godlameroso]

With current weight limits yes, but in 5-6 years we could have FE cars probably as fast as LMP 3 cars.

[Cold Fussion]

LMP3 performance is well below GP2 so It doesn't invalidate his statement.

[Andres125sx]

Weight limit is not that relevant, it´s battery technology the real limit.

To match F1 endurance with current battery technology it would need to be 6 times bigger (they last 15 minutes and should last 90 at least), or 1200kg of cells. That´s with FE power, to match also F1 power you need to multiply that by a factor of 3-3.5.

So with current technology battery would need to be around 4 tons to provide F1 power for one and a half hours. If energy density improve by a factor of 10 battery will still be 400kg, or double than current one

Decades far I´m afraid. But with same power and endurance they will be much much faster, so there´s no need to exactly match F1 power to match F1 perfomance, but even so, decades far.



Meanwhile F1 will be hybrid I think, but with each rule change the electric part will be bigger and the ICE smaller

[second]

Why is it worth it to be at the cutting edge of technology if it makes you slower?

1. The cars are not "slower".
2. The power to weight ratio is artificially governed by the regulations - not by the fact that the formula is "at the cutting edge of technology". A flick of the pen could easily increase the power by 50%.

That flick of the pen would:
1. make the expensive engines last a lot shorter time driving the costs even higher
2. would require redesign of the car so that teams can fit in bigger fuel tanks or batteries
3. New fuel flow sensors (I don't know if the current ones can be calibrated to higher number)
4. any increase of the electrical components will only make the cars even more heavy
5. And yes the electrical components do slow down the car. If the ICE can provide 650hp with weight cost of 145kg+fuel (245kg). But since the car starts the race with 100kg and ends with say 4kg the average becomes 52kg. So it is:
efficiency in race: 650hp/(245kg-48kg)=3,3hp/kg.
efficiency in quali: 650hp/(245kg-92kg)=4.25hp/kg.

The electrical system can provide 165hp for some 33 seconds per. Let's assume 60% of the lap time is done at full throttle. Lap time 1:40. This means that there are 0,6*100s=60s time where the driver asks full power from the engine. But the ers can only give it for 33s per lap. So about half (I know it is not this simple because acceleration out of corners is more important than acceleration at the end of the straight. But it also costs time to recharge the system which slows down the car. So 50% it is in the race. In quali the efficiency is maybe 70% because there is no need to recharge on fast lap.). So now:
hp/kg in the race is 0,5*165hp/60kg=1,375hp/kg
hp/kg in the quali is 0,7*165hp/60kg=1,925hp/kg
And let's assume driver could use the electric output all the time he is on throttle, 100% efficiency:
hp/kg at 100% efficiency is 1,0*165hp/60kg=2,75hp/kg. Still bad.

Not even close what the turbo engine can do even if we assume the ICE needs some fuel saving. But then again some teams do not even start with the maximum 100kg onboard.

So what about the v8? V8s had fuel tank of 150 litres. Weigh 120kg. Power about 750hp:
efficiency in race: 750hp/(120kg+0,73*150kg)=3,27hp/kg.
efficiency in quali: 750hp/(120kg+0,73*15kgkg)=5.73hp/kg.

ERS = slower.

Weight limit is not that relevant, it´s battery technology the real limit.

To match F1 endurance with current battery technology it would need to be 6 times bigger (they last 15 minutes and should last 90 at least), or 1200kg of cells. That´s with FE power, to match also F1 power you need to multiply that by a factor of 3-3.5.

So with current technology battery would need to be around 4 tons to provide F1 power for one and a half hours. If energy density improve by a factor of 10 battery will still be 400kg, or double than current one

Decades far I´m afraid. But with same power and endurance they will be much much faster, so there´s no need to exactly match F1 power to match F1 perfomance, but even so, decades far.

Wonder how much a small 900hp fusion reactor would weight

[hurril]

Why is it worth it to be at the cutting edge of technology if it makes you slower?

1. The cars are not "slower".
2. The power to weight ratio is artificially governed by the regulations - not by the fact that the formula is "at the cutting edge of technology". A flick of the pen could easily increase the power by 50%.

That flick of the pen would:
1. make the expensive engines last a lot shorter time driving the costs even higher
2. would require redesign of the car so that teams can fit in bigger fuel tanks or batteries
3. New fuel flow sensors (I don't know if the current ones can be calibrated to higher number)
4. any increase of the electrical components will only make the cars even more heavy
5. And yes the electrical components do slow down the car. If the ICE can provide 650hp with weight cost of 145kg+fuel (245kg). But since the car starts the race with 100kg and ends with say 4kg the average becomes 52kg. So it is:
efficiency in race: 650hp/(245kg-48kg)=3,3hp/kg.
efficiency in quali: 650hp/(245kg-92kg)=4.25hp/kg.

The electrical system can provide 165hp for some 33 seconds per. Let's assume 60% of the lap time is done at full throttle. Lap time 1:40. This means that there are 0,6*100s=60s time where the driver asks full power from the engine. But the ers can only give it for 33s per lap. So about half (I know it is not this simple because acceleration out of corners is more important than acceleration at the end of the straight. But it also costs time to recharge the system which slows down the car. So 50% it is in the race. In quali the efficiency is maybe 70% because there is no need to recharge on fast lap.). So now:
hp/kg in the race is 0,5*165hp/60kg=1,375hp/kg
hp/kg in the quali is 0,7*165hp/60kg=1,925hp/kg
And let's assume driver could use the electric output all the time he is on throttle, 100% efficiency:
hp/kg at 100% efficiency is 1,0*165hp/60kg=2,75hp/kg. Still bad.

Not even close what the turbo engine can do even if we assume the ICE needs some fuel saving. But then again some teams do not even start with the maximum 100kg onboard.

So what about the v8? V8s had fuel tank of 150 litres. Weigh 120kg. Power about 750hp:
efficiency in race: 750hp/(120kg+0,73*150kg)=3,27hp/kg.
efficiency in quali: 750hp/(120kg+0,73*15kgkg)=5.73hp/kg.

ERS = slower.

Weight limit is not that relevant, it´s battery technology the real limit.

To match F1 endurance with current battery technology it would need to be 6 times bigger (they last 15 minutes and should last 90 at least), or 1200kg of cells. That´s with FE power, to match also F1 power you need to multiply that by a factor of 3-3.5.

So with current technology battery would need to be around 4 tons to provide F1 power for one and a half hours. If energy density improve by a factor of 10 battery will still be 400kg, or double than current one

Decades far I´m afraid. But with same power and endurance they will be much much faster, so there´s no need to exactly match F1 power to match F1 perfomance, but even so, decades far.

Wonder how much a small 900hp fusion reactor would weight

There are too many errors in there. About 750? The mercs had 730(?) in 2014. The ERS can provide all 165hp 100% of the time - just not from battery power. They won't though because that would not be the optimum recovery strategy. Your back-of-a-napkin calculations are just too erroneous.

[ME4ME]

I think it would be interesting to have a very open engine regulations with the rules being a power limit, race fuel allowance and mandated RWD (with front axle harvesting if they wish).

I fully agree with this. I think F1 should, and probably will, continue on the path of ever improving efficiency. The 2021 regulations should in my opinion take the current regulations to the next level, while taking note of the lessons learning in the V6 era.

I'd like to see standardized MGU -H and -K, as well as battery units provided by the FIA and it's supplier of choice, in order to reduce costs on that front. By the time the new power units are introduced, MGU design will surely have matured to the point were development has stalled. Also battery technology is not something F1 manufacturers can do much about. Going for standardized parts will ensure economically affordable units.

On the engine side, as you said, there only need to be fuel flow and allowance limits, and what I'd also like to see is a reduced minimum weight for the whole PU as a package. Other than that, I'd like to see the PU regulations fully opened up. Let the manufacturers build whatever engine they deem fit for the fuel they're allowed to use. My problem with the current regulations is that although the PU's are very efficient, they could yet be much more efficient if the manufactures weren't limited by engine regulations.

For the fans sake, I'd like to see the FIA force the manufacturers to publicly specify PU basic properties such as displacement, number of cylinders etc. Also they should incorporate instantaneous power/torque measurements into the units and/or drivetrain and integrate them in the FOM live footage. There should no longer be secrecy over an engines capability.