A pure fuel-flow formula?

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

Somewhere in the 80s, Keith Duckworth of Cosworth had this idea of a pure fuel-flow formula, then run with whatever you like?

Qs;
. Would such a formula work today?
- What would the most efficient solution be, petrol only?
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

wuzak
wuzak
445
Joined: 30 Aug 2011, 03:26

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

xpensive wrote:Somewhere in the 80s, Keith Duckworth of Cosworth had this idea of a pure fuel-flow formula, then run with whatever you like?

Qs;
. Would such a formula work today?
- What would the most efficient solution be, petrol only?
Do you mean petrol but not Diesel, or do you exclude ERS as well?

I should think that if its is the former you would have much like we have now - though maybe with fewer cylinders and definitely with lower rpm.

If it is the latter then I would expect supercharged engines with mechanical turbo-compounding. Much like what Keith Duckworth proposed for his first turbo engine - a project which was cancelled when FISA said they would ban the engine once it won a race.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

Just the gasoline ICE, with lets say 40 g/second mass flow.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

CBeck113
CBeck113
51
Joined: 17 Feb 2013, 19:43

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

That sounds crazy....I like it!

- yes it would work, although top speed may be a bit too slow with 40g/s
- In that case, I think you'd see very small charged engines, either multi-staged turbos or superchargers (most likely the former), and 2 stroke unless you limit it to 4 strokes. The cars themselves would be light as a feather and basically be a rolling ground effect for downforce. They would probably carry their max speed through most curves too :D These engines could even end up as two or three cylinders, which come to think of it would be very road car relevant.

Alternative with ERS: the engines would then be used to run generators, which would then send the energy to electric motors. I can see why this wouldn't be wanted, although if done correctly they could be faster than your proposal of ICE only.
“Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!” Monty Python and the Holy Grail

User avatar
Tim.Wright
330
Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 06:29

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

How bout a power limited formula?

Torque sensor on each driveshaft, use the existing wheel speed sensors, and then do what you want upstream.
Not the engineer at Force India

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

CBeck113 wrote:That sounds crazy....I like it!

- yes it would work, although top speed may be a bit too slow with 40g/s
...
40 g/sec should yield some 900Hp, just about right if you ask me.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

CBeck113
CBeck113
51
Joined: 17 Feb 2013, 19:43

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

xpensive wrote:
CBeck113 wrote:That sounds crazy....I like it!

- yes it would work, although top speed may be a bit too slow with 40g/s
...
40 g/sec should yield some 900Hp, just about right if you ask me.
Thanks for the correction X, I was so focused on this year's 100g/min that I read it without thinking. In that case I think even 30g and a two stroke would be pretty huge, even if it is limited by knocking. I need my formulas to do some calculating, so I'll throw some numbers and get back tonight...
“Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!” Monty Python and the Holy Grail

User avatar
Holm86
245
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 03:37
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

CBeck113 wrote:
xpensive wrote:
CBeck113 wrote:That sounds crazy....I like it!

- yes it would work, although top speed may be a bit too slow with 40g/s
...
40 g/sec should yield some 900Hp, just about right if you ask me.
Thanks for the correction X, I was so focused on this year's 100g/min that I read it without thinking. In that case I think even 30g and a two stroke would be pretty huge, even if it is limited by knocking. I need my formulas to do some calculating, so I'll throw some numbers and get back tonight...
You also need to get your units straight ;-) This year is 100kg/h or 1666,66g/min or 27,77g/sec.
40g/sec would be 144kg/h a 44% increase of today's flow limit.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

If Gasoline is 44.4 MJ (MWs) per kg means that at 40 g/sec, 1780 kW, or 2400 Hp, of power is going into the ICE.

Now, what would be the best way to make use of that?
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

User avatar
matt21
86
Joined: 15 Mar 2010, 13:17

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

xpensive wrote:If Gasoline is 44.4 MJ (MWs) per kg means that at 40 g/sec, 1780 kW, or 2400 Hp, of power is going into the ICE.

Now, what would be the best way to make use of that?
I would build a 3L-V8 with twin turbo.
Enough displacement to overcome lag. But if I´m free in what to use, I would possibly use some kind of sequential turbochargers with VTG and variable intakes.

And, if ERS allowed, two MGU-H + MGU-K.

User avatar
Holm86
245
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 03:37
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

xpensive wrote:If Gasoline is 44.4 MJ (MWs) per kg means that at 40 g/sec, 1780 kW, or 2400 Hp, of power is going into the ICE.

Now, what would be the best way to make use of that?
I don't think you can look away from pressure charging if you want the most efficient engine (which of course you do).
But if we are not using any ERS systems, the engine would displacement wise be a compromise of large displacement (so the turbine won't be too slow to spool) and small displacement (to get less friction).
But ideally the engine should run at as low rpm as possible, with small displacement, and very high boost pressure??

wuzak
wuzak
445
Joined: 30 Aug 2011, 03:26

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

Holm86 wrote:
xpensive wrote:If Gasoline is 44.4 MJ (MWs) per kg means that at 40 g/sec, 1780 kW, or 2400 Hp, of power is going into the ICE.

Now, what would be the best way to make use of that?
I don't think you can look away from pressure charging if you want the most efficient engine (which of course you do).
But if we are not using any ERS systems, the engine would displacement wise be a compromise of large displacement (so the turbine won't be too slow to spool) and small displacement (to get less friction).
But ideally the engine should run at as low rpm as possible, with small displacement, and very high boost pressure??
If you aaare not using ERS then you could use two smaller turbos to get around teh spooling issue.

If you use ERS (turbocompounding) without electric devices you would use the wastegate to feed exhaust to a secondary turbine which is connected to the engin via a variable speed drive.

wuzak
wuzak
445
Joined: 30 Aug 2011, 03:26

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

Tim.Wright wrote:How bout a power limited formula?

Torque sensor on each driveshaft, use the existing wheel speed sensors, and then do what you want upstream.
That's teh whole idea of a fuel flow formula.

Jolle
Jolle
132
Joined: 29 Jan 2014, 22:58
Location: Dordrecht

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

You would get an ICE that would run at 100% all of the time and when the driver doesn't need full power (breaking, mid corner, exit), all the energie would get harvested by a kers unit. I presume they do the same thing now until some extent (charging the batteries mid corner or when there is not enough grip to have full throttle)

Interesting ideas but with all the hybrid components possible these days quite complicated and very expensive (compared to the "mechanical 80ies)

User avatar
Tim.Wright
330
Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 06:29

Re: A pure fuel-flow formula?

Post

wuzak wrote:
Tim.Wright wrote:How bout a power limited formula?

Torque sensor on each driveshaft, use the existing wheel speed sensors, and then do what you want upstream.
That's teh whole idea of a fuel flow formula.
Except it doesn't restrict you to a petrol ICE as the only alternative...
Not the engineer at Force India