Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Tommy Cookers]

you do need to change radically the composition of an alloy to change radically its stiffness (elastic modulus)
anyone who can do this another way should first patent his method and then make billions

so we might have scope for 47 or 48% of tungsten in an alloy making the main part (crankshaft) ie that doing the hard work

the rules envisage THAs being used as bolt-on counterbalance weights
maybe a multi-piece crankshaft could be made from a THA and be legal unless protested

THAs or alloys with 48% tungsten could like Lockalloy (beryllium/aluminium 'alloys') be categorised as composites not alloys ?
tungsten will not form (solid) solutions with other constituents ?
hysteresis would be far higher ?? than our usual materials and cause significant self-heating (and, usefully, self-damping)

[godlameroso]

you do need to change radically the composition of an alloy to change radically its stiffness (elastic modulus)
anyone who can do this another way should first patent his method and then make billions

so we might have scope for 47 or 48% of tungsten in an alloy making the main part (crankshaft) ie that doing the hard work

the rules envisage THAs being used as bolt-on counterbalance weights
maybe a multi-piece crankshaft could be made from a THA and be legal unless protested

THAs or alloys with 48% tungsten could like Lockalloy (beryllium/aluminium 'alloys') be categorised as composites not alloys ?
tungsten will not form (solid) solutions with other constituents ?
hysteresis would be far higher ?? than our usual materials and cause significant self-heating (and, usefully, self-damping)

Well the art of changing the properties of steel by changing the carbon content has been known for ages. Japan made some really cool swords exploiting these properties some 350 years ago.

Anywho

These parts assembled to the crankshaft may be manufactured in a Tungsten based material.

Apparently the regulations allow THA's as technically by definition THA's are tungsten based.

This is what the regulations say about composites

5.15.4 Composite Materials – These are materials where a matrix material is reinforced by either a continuous or discontinuous phase. The matrix can be metallic, ceramic, polymeric or glass based. The reinforcement can be present as long fibres (fibre length greater than 13mm) or short fibres, whiskers and particles (discontinuous reinforcement). Nanoscale reinforced materials are to be considered as composites. (a reinforcement is considered to be nanoscale if any dimension of the reinforcement is less than 100nm.)

I would imagine a fiber reinforced metal would fall under this definition, but not a metal like THA that has a few percent filler.

I could however be completely off base.

[Tommy Cookers]

that AlBe is now categorised as a metal matrix composite
(though the recipe is identical to the original Lockalloy and it is still known by that name)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlBeMet
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Lsk ... MC&f=false
AlBe would make a very high natural frequency crankshaft, Be having a freakishly high ratio of elastic modulus to density

http://www.itia.info/supperalloys.html
tungsten has a very high density and a correspondingly high elastic modulus
afaik it has an impossibly high melting point for it to be truly alloyed ??
48% tungsten would raise crankshaft natural frequency in use by about 20% and reduce deflection by more than this

yes, adding about 2% carbon to iron improves its strength about tenfold
but the elastic modulus is hardly changed

[etusch]

I don't think these ICEs are dieseling, or at least designed to operate that way. The idea is to ignite extremely lean mixtures, reliably.

Tji technology is an otto / diesel cycle, Malhe look for a way to get the thermal efficiency of diesel cars in street cars of gas, from there it was coupled to the F1.

Nope completely wrong. TJI is on the opposite spectrum of diesel. TJI induces very rapid ignition. Even more rapid than spark. Diesel flame speeds is the lowest. And the primary reason why diesel are rpm limited.

Diesels are use high compression and long stroke. May be high compression level does not affect too much but I am sure that long stroke ratio cause slow routing and low max rpm level.

[godlameroso]

that AlBe is now categorised as a metal matrix composite
(though the recipe is identical to the original Lockalloy and it is still known by that name)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlBeMet
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Lsk ... MC&f=false
AlBe would make a very high natural frequency crankshaft, Be having a freakishly high ratio of elastic modulus to density

tungsten has a very high density and a correspondingly high elastic modulus
afaik it has an impossibly high melting point for it to be truly alloyed
48% tungsten would raise crankshaft natural frequency in use by about 20% and reduce deflection by more than this

yes, adding about 2% carbon to iron improves its strength about tenfold
but the elastic modulus is hardly changed

Ahhh thanks for clearing that up.

[63l8qrrfy6]

Is it possible that these extreme vibrations are due to the (supposed) unorthodox sequence of cylinder firing?

I don't know nothing about cylinder order and how it affects the engine, just got the bit that supposedly Honda are using a "rare" firing order... how possible that partly this order is responsible for these unexpected vibrations?

Can you indicate the source of your information?

Hasegawa;

It might hurt more because China has a longer straight," Hasegawa said. "So that [straight] will be very painful I think; that's why we are trying to introduce something more but we can't promise about that."
"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication & competence."

The most affordable to change in two weeks would be the crankshaft, with the same measures but a more rigid material.

Utter bullshit! cranks are steel, young's modulus is about 200GPa. That varies by less than 5% across most grades of steel.
also, 2 weeks to change a crank forging is unheard of even in F1.

finally- the crank is very stiff compared to other elements in the driveline (input shaft for example). Increasing stiffness won't do a thing.

[63l8qrrfy6]

that AlBe is now categorised as a metal matrix composite
(though the recipe is identical to the original Lockalloy and it is still known by that name)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlBeMet
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Lsk ... MC&f=false
AlBe would make a very high natural frequency crankshaft, Be having a freakishly high ratio of elastic modulus to density

tungsten has a very high density and a correspondingly high elastic modulus
afaik it has an impossibly high melting point for it to be truly alloyed
48% tungsten would raise crankshaft natural frequency in use by about 20% and reduce deflection by more than this

yes, adding about 2% carbon to iron improves its strength about tenfold
but the elastic modulus is hardly changed

whatever you would get by increasing stiffness with tungsten you lose due to its density..
keep in mind that natural frequency is proportional to sqrt(k/m). k/m ratio is bad for tungsten..

also you can't make a crank out of it )

[Tommy Cookers]

aren't you ignoring the inertia of the rods and pistons ? - a substantial factor wrt the natural frequency of the whole
it's unchanged but the tungsten crank is much stiffer

ok if the transmission is the critical factor ie were it to be made from 48% tungsten material your point (which I mentioned) stands

[godlameroso]

Is it possible that these extreme vibrations are due to the (supposed) unorthodox sequence of cylinder firing?

I don't know nothing about cylinder order and how it affects the engine, just got the bit that supposedly Honda are using a "rare" firing order... how possible that partly this order is responsible for these unexpected vibrations?

Can you indicate the source of your information?

Hasegawa;

It might hurt more because China has a longer straight," Hasegawa said. "So that [straight] will be very painful I think; that's why we are trying to introduce something more but we can't promise about that."
"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication & competence."

The most affordable to change in two weeks would be the crankshaft, with the same measures but a more rigid material.

Utter bullshit! cranks are steel, young's modulus is about 200GPa. That varies by less than 5% across most grades of steel.
also, 2 weeks to change a crank forging is unheard of even in F1.

finally- the crank is very stiff compared to other elements in the driveline (input shaft for example). Increasing stiffness won't do a thing.

Assuming that they started work after Australia, however if they were working on a new crank since testing, it's maybe, almost, kind of, sort of possible. Although they'd be changing a critical component and would probably cost them a power unit.

[63l8qrrfy6]

aren't you ignoring the inertia of the rods and pistons ? - a substantial factor wrt the natural frequency
it's unchanged but the tungsten crank is much stiffer

ok if the transmission is the critical factor ie were it to be made from 48% tungsten material your point (which I think I mentioned) stands

Rods and pistons still contribute to the crank throw mass (the rotating portion contributes with its full mass while the reciprocating portion contributes only half its mass)

To find the frequencies, the masses (inertias in this case) are summed at each throw and connected with torsional springs having the same torsional stiffness as the portion of crankshaft that extends from the middle of one pin to the middle of the next pin. Everything else along the drivetrain - gearbox, geartrain, differential still has to be accounted for either a large 'lump' inertia or by a discretized mass-elastic representation.

[JuanjoTS]

My theory since 2014 is that two injectors are used, and the injector inside the pre-chamber is not considered a direct injector.

There is no injector in the pre-chamber, the filling of the pre-chamber occurs at the time of compression of the main chamber of the cylinder.

Calling it pre-camera can lead to errors, if we talk about admission would be sub-camera, since its filling is later than the main camera,If we talk about explosion it's pre-chamber, the explosion occurs prior to that of the main camera (Is used as a super spark plug )

Ideally, it should be called a pre-combustion chamber to avoid misunderstandings.

That is easy to say... proof?

It is not easy, it took years to couple it to the f1 standard. It's not my theories, it's just what I learn to read.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/L2Qv6wdZ9f4[/youtube]

[amho]

Hi, there is some claims in this forum that Honda is 150 hp down to Mercedes that made me curious to do some estimation to assess the situation so I did my calculations based on these parameters:
-front area: 1.442 m^2 based on measuring-scaling Ferrari photo(pic link in follow)
-Air density: 1.225 kg/m^2
-car weight: 628 kg
-rolling coefficient: 0.015 (in the worst case)
-After a quick search on the net I found that Cd changes from 0.7 to 1.2 based on aero. configuartion for these F1 cars so I considered three different drag coefficient: 0.7, 1, 1.2 to compare different scenarios.
-I assumed qualifying speed traps(Alonso for Honda: 316.6 km/h , Stroll as fastest Mercedes: 328.6 km/h, Bottas the slowest Mercedes: 321.1 km/h)

and final result:
-If we consider Cd equal to 0.7 then Honda power deficit to fastest Mercedes is 65hp and the slowest Mercedes only 24 hp!
-If we consider Cd equal to 1 then Honda power deficit to fastest Mercedes is 95hp and the slowest Mercedes 35 hp!
-If we consider Cd equal to 1.2 then Honda power deficit to fastest Mercedes is 114hp and the slowest Mercedes 41 hp!
correct me if u see any mistakes.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4O-M ... k41RmNlUE0
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4O-M ... DhXQ3VfOG8

[JuanjoTS]

I don't think these ICEs are dieseling, or at least designed to operate that way. The idea is to ignite extremely lean mixtures, reliably.

Tji technology is an otto / diesel cycle, Malhe look for a way to get the thermal efficiency of diesel cars in street cars of gas, from there it was coupled to the F1.

Nope completely wrong. TJI is on the opposite spectrum of diesel. TJI induces very rapid ignition. Even more rapid than spark. Diesel flame speeds is the lowest. And the primary reason why diesel are rpm limited.

The concept is to copy the diesel cycle as much as possible, autoignition by compression. Neither is my theory, is what I read.

[tcooper27]

It is not easy, it took years to couple it to the f1 standard. It's not my theories, it's just what I learn to read.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/L2Qv6wdZ9f4[/youtube]

The concept is to copy the diesel cycle as much as possible, autoignition by compression. Neither is my theory, is what I read.

Where did you read these things? Nothing in that video supports what you're saying.

[63l8qrrfy6]

Hi, there is some claims in this forum that Honda is 150 hp down to Mercedes that made me curious to do some estimation to assess the situation so I did my calculations based on these parameters:
-front area: 1.442 m^2 based on measuring-scaling Ferrari photo(pic link in follow)
-Air density: 1.225 kg/m^2
-car weight: 628 kg
-rolling coefficient: 0.015 (in the worst case)
-After a quick search on the net I found that Cd changes from 0.7 to 1.2 based on aero. configuartion for these F1 cars so I considered three different drag coefficient: 0.7, 1, 1.2 to compare different scenarios.
-I assumed qualifying speed traps(Alonso for Honda: 316.6 km/h , Stroll as fastest Mercedes: 328.6 km/h, Bottas the slowest Mercedes: 321.1 km/h)

and final result:
-If we consider Cd equal to 0.7 then Honda power deficit to fastest Mercedes is 65hp and the slowest Mercedes only 24 hp!
-If we consider Cd equal to 1 then Honda power deficit to fastest Mercedes is 95hp and the slowest Mercedes 35 hp!
-If we consider Cd equal to 1.2 then Honda power deficit to fastest Mercedes is 114hp and the slowest Mercedes 41 hp!
correct me if u see any mistakes.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4O-M ... k41RmNlUE0
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4O-M ... DhXQ3VfOG8

I presume you estimated a wheel diameter, calculated wheel torque required to overcome the total resistance and then calculated power from torque using the same engine speed for all cars ? Unfortunately in this case the results are very sensitive to gearbox ratios.. hard to distinguish between a difference in power and a difference in gearing .. and also different corner exit speeds.

Ideally you would have 2 speed traps in a straight line and know how long it takes for each car to get from one trap to the other as well as both trap speeds. With this you can calculate the work done between traps and the rate of doing work (power).