Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[diffuser]

Maybe stretching the truth...

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... 50-seconds

50 seconds sounds a bit much to me . Seems like a very fuel hungry engine then

I think EB is start to feel the heat of the Honda improvements and he is trying to create a smoke screen in order to easy the preassure over the Mclaren responsability on the chassis and aero deficit.
Honda have a long way to go but EB is making that is his problems are only Honda related.

Not sure what his goal is with this ......Maybe it's something he said in a pinch and regrets saying....

Putting more pressure doesn't help cause atleast for 2016 ...there is only so much they can do with the tokens in hand.

I think it's been obvious over the last 2 races that McLaren/Honda race day pace has been held up more by PU Fuel efficiency than Chassis.

1 -They have less power so are running less rear wing.(leads to less front wing (maintain balance), therefore, less overall down force).
2-Less Fuel efficient so carry more fuel through most of the race.
3- No.1+ No. 2 cause higher tire degradation

They've brought good size aero/Chassis updates to every race. It's the same PU.

[Sasha]

The next tokens used will most likely be for the MGU-H because it needs better cooling.So that will improve the ERS.

The only improvements to do to this spec PU is too fix the MGU-H(better ER) and better software.(better deployment)
So they can get a few more tenths of a second.With this PU design,they are maxed out with the fuel flow now.

The big step for performance will need a new combustion(pre-chamber and better injectors) and bigger turbo.

You'd think that Improving cooling would require 0 tokens as it is reliability fix. You should be able to run it hard enough in Free practice to have it fail then.

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

[loner]

Confirm?

If you review the video and stills posted here, along with following translations:

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... start=3375

Seems like they´re pretty much out of working room for further TC expansion within the V

Ok. I see why you say that but geometry shows that you can fit circles of any radius inside a V. It is just a matter of how tall Honda would make the engine. The v6 is 90 degrees so if you put a circle in the v you can create an imaginary square from the centre of the circle to the edges to the corner of the V. The length of each side is equeal to the radius and Each bank is 45 degrees to horizontal. Soo.. For an extreme case,and assumingthat that there is absolutely no space clearance around the turbo in the Vee, a 30mm bigger turbo will increase the height of the top of the turbo by (30/2)mm/cos45 degrees +(30/2)mm= 21mm +15mm = 36mm.

So a 30mm increas in turbo size is huge.. But you can see the height increase of 36mm which will raise not just the Centre of the turbo the airbox and exhaust pipe and other things.... Is not impossible to design into the engine. And this is assuming that all space is already used up in the Vee.. i am not sure how detrimental the effect will be on car performance and packaging though. I am no expert..

interesting

[jure]

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

Last year Mercedes also improved their engine under reliability rules. After that they were able to run their performance mode for longer periods.

[diffuser]

You'd think that Improving cooling would require 0 tokens as it is reliability fix. You should be able to run it hard enough in Free practice to have it fail then.

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

In my opinion ... if you need to use a product for X amount of hrs at y rate. If you use it at Y rate but fails cause it overheats before X time, that would be a reliability issue. Regardless if using it for X time will make you go around the track faster. Any part that fails before being able to run 5 races would be eligible for reliability update.

I would consider a performance upgrade a change that would increase the max Y rate from Y to Y+10. Since the ERS has a max deployment set, you can't really increase the the rate. Changing the efficiency of the ERS would be a different story.
At any rate , I haven't heard that they have have a issue with the ERS. If they do we don't have any details about what it is. The devil is in the details

[wuzak]

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

Last year Mercedes also improved their engine under reliability rules. After that they were able to run their performance mode for longer periods.

The rules have been tightened since.

Ferrari wanted to have their latest upgrade as a reliability upgrade, but had to use 3 tokens instead.

[gruntguru]

Maybe stretching the truth...
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... 50-seconds

50 seconds sounds a bit much to me . Seems like a very fuel hungry engine then

For the benefit of those out there that might assume a "fuel hungry engine" means a piston engine that uses more fuel than the competition.

The "engines" all use fuel at the same rate - 100 kg/hr @ full power. If two engines have similar "full power" performance, they have similar crankshaft power (plus a maximum 120 kW for each that can be added from the MGUK).

A possible difference between the two engines is the power recovered from the MGUH (which is equal to turbine power minus compressor power). The engine with higher MGUH power will be able to operate for longer with 120 kW going to the MGUK before depleting the ES, at which point the "full power" output must drop to the self-sustaining output (crankshaft plus MGUH). To make up the shortfall, the weaker engine can be used to charge the ES during part load sections of the course by loading the MGUK and/or the MGUH to charge the ES. Of course this requires extra fuel giving rise to the term "thirsty engine" for what is in fact a less powerful power unit.

[Serbian4ever]

[Mansell89]

It is pretty infuriating that there is a system (token) F1 that actually prevents the advancement in performance.

I thought that McLaren had increased compressor size over the winter which in turn was going to fix the energy recovery issue? But now we are saying that there can't be optimum electrical power because the car is using too much fuel to maintain performance?

Promising that they are showing glimpses of the pace that is in that chassis, just a terrible shame that they might not be able to sort the engine totally until the off season yet AGAIN.

[hemichromis]

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

Last year Mercedes also improved their engine under reliability rules. After that they were able to run their performance mode for longer periods.

In 2014 Honda was blocked from doing the same.

[jure]

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

Last year Mercedes also improved their engine under reliability rules. After that they were able to run their performance mode for longer periods.

In 2014 Honda was blocked from doing the same.

If I remember correctly, Honda wanted large redesign, while Mercedes just strengthened some components/improved cooling.

[hemichromis]

Last year Mercedes also improved their engine under reliability rules. After that they were able to run their performance mode for longer periods.

In 2014 Honda was blocked from doing the same.

If I remember correctly, Honda wanted large redesign, while Mercedes just strengthened some components/improved cooling.

True but at the time their reliability was shocking.
22 engines in 20 races, very little power at the best of times.

Big problems require big solutions.

Mercedes had a problem whereby they were only .5 s ahead they wanted more of course.

[namao]

ALO was the fastest on finish line at the Russian GP. Seems that Honda's PU has a good aceleration. I can remember McLaren had good starts in 2015 also. https://twitter.com/hlawiczka/status/726869017831563264

[diffuser]

ALO was the fastest on finish line at the Russian GP. Seems that Honda's PU has a good aceleration. I can remember McLaren had good starts in 2015 also.
https://twitter.com/hlawiczka/status/726869017831563264

You can't use all the power from the PU on starts, you'll just get wheel spin. It's more about mechanical grip(chassis) and control of the PU power off the line. Then whoever has the most downforce can apply power sooner and at slower speeds(again chassis). Having less power could help you get off the line faster.

This year there is the whole new thing about the single clutch that people need to get used to.

[diffuser]

Will cost tokens because it is still a performance gain.

Last year Mercedes also improved their engine under reliability rules. After that they were able to run their performance mode for longer periods.

The rules have been tightened since.

Ferrari wanted to have their latest upgrade as a reliability upgrade, but had to use 3 tokens instead.

You really need to know what they tried to change. I won't put it past any team to try and slip in more than a reliability change. I don't think the rules changed. Since the other teams have to approve that the changes are "reliability" it is possible that blocking is escalating.