Mclaren Honda 2015

[Thunder18]

It was Honda's own words, rather Ito's whom said it on the announcement of their return to F1, that they had the Hybrid knowhow. Can't find original press release, but since have said they underestimated the complexity of the F1 system.

[mrluke]

There is no grey area at all between transfer from mguh to mguk there is a very clear diagram included in the rules specifically showing that energy transfer is unlimited from h to k subject to thethe overall output limit of the k.

It would be somewhat surprising if Honda have repeated Ferraris mistake given that they had the whole year of watching ferrari do it.

[bergie88]

There is no grey area at all between transfer from mguh to mguk there is a very clear diagram included in the rules specifically showing that energy transfer is unlimited from h to k subject to thethe overall output limit of the k.

It would be somewhat surprising if Honda have repeated Ferraris mistake given that they had the whole year of watching ferrari do it.

Exactly. If I (as a simple automotive engineer) had a first look at the current regulations, the next thing I would do is to figure out how I can get the most power from the MGU-H to the MGU-K. It looks like Ferrari and Honda were at first sight more worried about packaging, but you are nowhere when you miss 100bhp. Also big probs to Mercedes, without big problems by far the best powerunit for almost 2 years now, very impressive.

[diffuser]

Interesting article from Craig Scarborough http://www.grid1.tv/motorsport/article/ ... carborough

[Cold Fussion]

From a person with knowledge over on vtec.net
"Honda's Turbo/MGU-H either is too small or wasn't designed to transfer energy directly to the MGU-K.(remember that is a grey area in the rules around 4mj per lap.....in the past Honda always see rules in black and white and never go for the grey area)

I pick they went to small with the Turbo/MGU-H and that is why they can't fix it this year(too many tokens and short on time)

So at tracks like Spa and Monza with long straits and very few corners......the MGU-H is the most important thing.

to correct the MGU-H.....they must redo the whole PU....it is like dominos falling....all parts work together.

So this year with their tokens they fixed the ICE and MGU-K(a must,it was overheating and eating seals)

Next season...new ERS(MGU-H,MGU-K and Battery) and Turbo.
Also more ICE upgrades.

I don't think this person has any knowledge at all.

[j.yank]

I don’t think that MGU-H is downsized and underpowered comparing to Ferrari’s. Arai raised a lot of speculation and he was ridiculed by many for the claim that they will be at the same level as Ferrari, but let see closer this “strange” 34 Alonso lap at Spa: all of his laps before and after this lap were at least 3 sec. behind. This short burst of competitiveness can be explained only if he had full available power, similar to Ferrari. This fastest lap is better than the FL of all Ferrari powered cars. Many argue that this is because of the tires, but Sauber cars stopped for new soft tires only 3-4 laps before Alonso and they did not manage better FL than he did. Nasr FL is 0.29 sec behind Alonso, and Ericsson FL is 0.33 sec behind. This cannot be explained with the fuel but even if we can, than it means that at least Maclaren-Honda are very, very close to Ferrari powered Sauber. But how we can compare them with Ferrari itself? Yes, Vetel pitted 16 laps before Alonso and he was on mediums but his FL was only five laps before Alonso FL and his tempo in lap 34 wasn’t far from this: 1:55.316 in 29th lap and 1:55.761 in 34th lap. In this way, Alonso FL was 1.624 sec quicker than Vetel’s FL. The difference between soft and medium was around 1.3 sec. If we take into account fuel difference and any other factors favorable to Vetel, then still Alonso will be very, very close to Vetel. Why they didn’t push this speed through the whole race? There could be various reasons: the new engine mappings still weren’t tested and tuned; MGU-H overheats; or just simply they didn’t want to put the new engine under any risks and to save it for circuits were they can be more competitive. However, delivering such quick lap shows that at least MGU-H is not downsized or underpowered.

[Sixbarboost]

...
From a person with knowledge over on vtec.net
"Honda's Turbo/MGU-H either is too small or wasn't designed to transfer energy directly to the MGU-K.(remember that is a grey area in the rules around 4mj per lap.....in the past Honda always see rules in black and white and never go for the grey area)

I pick they went to small with the Turbo/MGU-H and that is why they can't fix it this year(too many tokens and short on time)

So at tracks like Spa and Monza with long straits and very few corners......the MGU-H is the most important thing.

to correct the MGU-H.....they must redo the whole PU....it is like dominos falling....all parts work together.

So this year with their tokens they fixed the ICE and MGU-K(a must,it was overheating and eating seals)

Next season...new ERS(MGU-H,MGU-K and Battery) and Turbo.
Also more ICE upgrades.

Contrary to other members, I find this explanation quite plausble, while I suspect it's all down to the optimized ambition,
but somehow the powertransfer from the MGU-H to the MGU-K was at least underestimated.

[trinidefender]

I don’t think that MGU-H is downsized and underpowered comparing to Ferrari’s. Arai raised a lot of speculation and he was ridiculed by many for the claim that they will be at the same level as Ferrari, but let see closer this “strange” 34 Alonso lap at Spa: all of his laps before and after this lap were at least 3 sec. behind. This short burst of competitiveness can be explained only if he had full available power, similar to Ferrari. This fastest lap is better than the FL of all Ferrari powered cars. Many argue that this is because of the tires, but Sauber cars stopped for new soft tires only 3-4 laps before Alonso and they did not manage better FL than he did. Nasr FL is 0.29 sec behind Alonso, and Ericsson FL is 0.33 sec behind. This cannot be explained with the fuel but even if we can, than it means that at least Maclaren-Honda are very, very close to Ferrari powered Sauber. But how we can compare them with Ferrari itself? Yes, Vetel pitted 16 laps before Alonso and he was on mediums but his FL was only five laps before Alonso FL and his tempo in lap 34 wasn’t far from this: 1:55.316 in 29th lap and 1:55.761 in 34th lap. In this way, Alonso FL was 1.624 sec quicker than Vetel’s FL. The difference between soft and medium was around 1.3 sec. If we take into account fuel difference and any other factors favorable to Vetel, then still Alonso will be very, very close to Vetel. Why they didn’t push this speed through the whole race? There could be various reasons: the new engine mappings still weren’t tested and tuned; MGU-H overheats; or just simply they didn’t want to put the new engine under any risks and to save it for circuits were they can be more competitive. However, delivering such quick lap shows that at least MGU-H is not downsized or underpowered.

People weren't really saying the MGU-H was undersized. They were saying that the turbocharger turbine was to small. This was one of the thoughts as to why the Ferrari engine was not powerful enough last year. When the turbine is to small it is only able to extract a certain amount of energy from the exhaust. Driving the compressor takes a certain amount of energy. Therefore if your turbine is to small it might hinder the generation capability of the MGU-H.

On the plus side a smaller turbine leads to quicker spool up times meaning less work has to be done by the MGU-H to spool it up. Also it means that more energy can be extracted at part throttle loads meaning better compressor performance.

Compressors and turbines have efficiency ranges. It may be that Honda focused to much on ICE performance and not enough on generating electricity from the MGU-H. If you size a turbine that has an efficiency range based purely on ice performance it is fine. If you then add the load of the MGU-H trying to produce electricity it is going to take the turbine out of its efficiency range. However if you size the turbine with an efficiency range for both powering the compressor and the MGU-H (generally a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gasses) then it will have worse transient response, worse performance at part throttle/load and have a lower efficiency if it isn't trying to power the MGU-H and just needs to turn the compressor.

[amho]

it seems that Alonso's 5th fastest lap on lap 34 doesn't mean that they have raised the power for a single lap if it was the case we would see much better top speed on the lap & also they could do this in the qualifying, maybe Alonso has pushed so hard on that lap and destroyed his tire wear for next few laps.
Correct me if I say wrong words, as I know MGU-H harvests energy during the deceleration(in place of wastegate) so in circuits like SPA and Monza with long straights compared to low braking time, MGU-H can't recover much energy & if we assume by rumors that they placed MGU-H in v-area of engine so they have a small size turbine that limits top energy recovery capacity .I should mention another fact that by increasing the temperature,the high rev capacity of bearing decreases so they can't rev up the MGU-H to increase energy recovery rate.

[j.yank]

it seems that Alonso's 5th fastest lap on lap 34 doesn't mean that they have raised the power for a single lap if it was the case we would see much better top speed on the lap & also they could do this in the qualifying, maybe Alonso has pushed so hard on that lap and destroyed his tire wear for next few laps.

2.7 sec difference between 34 and 35 laps cannot be attributed to tire degradation of brand new tires.

[Tommy Cookers]

..... However if you size the turbine with an efficiency range for both powering the compressor and the MGU-H (generally a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gasses) then it will have worse transient response, worse performance at part throttle/load and have a lower efficiency if it isn't trying to power the MGU-H and just needs to turn the compressor.

'a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gases' also might ....
allow a lower exhaust pressure (when only driving the compressor) than would a turbine sized only to drive the compressor ?
and said lower exhaust pressure would allow a greater crankshaft power ?
a win-win situation ?

[lebesset]

I'm sure the answer is in the last 108 pages but can sombody confirm my belief that the tokens don't all have to be used by the last race but can be used by year end instead ?

[bergie88]

it seems that Alonso's 5th fastest lap on lap 34 doesn't mean that they have raised the power for a single lap if it was the case we would see much better top speed on the lap & also they could do this in the qualifying, maybe Alonso has pushed so hard on that lap and destroyed his tire wear for next few laps.
Correct me if I say wrong words, as I know MGU-H harvests energy during the deceleration(in place of wastegate) so in circuits like SPA and Monza with long straights compared to low braking time, MGU-H can't recover much energy & if we assume by rumors that they placed MGU-H in v-area of engine so they have a small size turbine that limits top energy recovery capacity .I should mention another fact that by increasing the temperature,the high rev capacity of bearing decreases so they can't rev up the MGU-H to increase energy recovery rate.

I have to correct you, the MGU-H is not harvesting during deceleration, that is what the MGU-K does. The MGU-H is harvesting when the car is accelerating or at full speed. In a turbo the waste gate opens when the turbo delivers the desired boost pressure, preventing a too high turbo pressure. A lot of energy in the gases is wasted at that moment, and this energy can be harvested by the MGU-H.

..... However if you size the turbine with an efficiency range for both powering the compressor and the MGU-H (generally a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gasses) then it will have worse transient response, worse performance at part throttle/load and have a lower efficiency if it isn't trying to power the MGU-H and just needs to turn the compressor.

'a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gases' also might ....
allow a lower exhaust pressure (when only driving the compressor) than would a turbine sized only to drive the compressor ?
and said lower exhaust pressure would allow a greater crankshaft power ?
a win-win situation ?

This sounds very plausible, I think it is true.

[trinidefender]

..... However if you size the turbine with an efficiency range for both powering the compressor and the MGU-H (generally a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gasses) then it will have worse transient response, worse performance at part throttle/load and have a lower efficiency if it isn't trying to power the MGU-H and just needs to turn the compressor.

'a larger turbine that can better flow the exhaust gases' also might ....
allow a lower exhaust pressure (when only driving the compressor) than would a turbine sized only to drive the compressor ?
and said lower exhaust pressure would allow a greater crankshaft power ?
a win-win situation ?

There is that. However way you take it the compressor needs a certain amount of energy to move a certain amount of air. If you create a turbine that is large with very little back pressure at that mass flow then it will extract very little energy to turn the compressor. So while yes it may have the advantage of providing a lower back pressure it may come at the cost of creating a situation where the MGU-H has provide some torque on the turbocharger shaft to keep the compressor spinning at the correct rpm.

Agree?

[XRayF1]

I'm sure the answer is in the last 108 pages but can sombody confirm my belief that the tokens don't all have to be used by the last race but can be used by year end instead ?

I believe the regulation states that the tokens may be used throughout the F1 season.
(while unused tokens may not be taken into the new season)

In my opinion, the entire F1 season is defined with the official start of the first race (Thu of this very weekend) and the end of the event on Sunday of the last race. For me the two crucial dates are the 11th March and the 29th Nov.

Which means a team/engine supplier would have to use all tokens by 29/11 and introduce a new engine spec by the weekend's Sat (changing the engine from Fri to Sat).

To be honest, I dug into the the F1 Technical Regulations, dated 3/12/2014, but couldn't find a reference except for Appendix 4, ANNUAL F1 POWER UNIT HOMOLOGATION.
However it proved to be inconclusive as it only states year figures, 'in 2015', etc., rather than a duration/period for a year.