2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[f1316]

However, you are increasing the fuel flow rate for more power. And likely taking advantage of the lighter weight to post faster lap times, ending up with the engine at full fuel flow for a higher percentage of time.

But if the times are faster then you're racing for less time so even if the percentage of that time at full fuel flow increased, the two could conceivably even themselves out.

In any case, you may be right, they'll probably have to increase total fuel if they increase fuel flow (although they're now saying they won't) but I still believe that dividing your total fuel into sections must be more efficient.

Obviously I convinced the strategy group too since they've taken up my idea!

[wuzak]

However, you are increasing the fuel flow rate for more power. And likely taking advantage of the lighter weight to post faster lap times, ending up with the engine at full fuel flow for a higher percentage of time.

But if the times are faster then you're racing for less time so even if the percentage of that time at full fuel flow increased, the two could conceivably even themselves out.

Even if the race time was reduced, the number of laps is still teh same and you'll be using more fuel per lap.

In any case, you may be right, they'll probably have to increase total fuel if they increase fuel flow (although they're now saying they won't) but I still believe that dividing your total fuel into sections must be more efficient.

The strategy group is talking 5-6s gain in lap time. 100kg isn't going to be enough.

[dren]

There is no way that you can increase the power, reduce lap times, and keep the same race fuel allowance.

I'd suggest dropping the race fuel allowance altogether, which should allow them to push harder for longer.

Sure there is, isn't that where efficiency comes into play?

Yes, I agree with you, they should just drop the race fuel allowance. If they end up dropping the fuel flow limit equation, I see the ICEs being downsped.

[ringo]

However, you are increasing the fuel flow rate for more power. And likely taking advantage of the lighter weight to post faster lap times, ending up with the engine at full fuel flow for a higher percentage of time.

But if the times are faster then you're racing for less time so even if the percentage of that time at full fuel flow increased, the two could conceivably even themselves out.

Even if the race time was reduced, the number of laps is still teh same and you'll be using more fuel per lap.

In any case, you may be right, they'll probably have to increase total fuel if they increase fuel flow (although they're now saying they won't) but I still believe that dividing your total fuel into sections must be more efficient.

The strategy group is talking 5-6s gain in lap time. 100kg isn't going to be enough.

You are ignoring the considerably reduced weight of the car. They will use less or just the same fuel.

[DiogoBrand]

A little question here:
Some people say that the current power units could achieve the 1000hp mark they're talking about for 2017 just by removing the fuel flow limit, and that this would also increase and improve the exhaust sound. I'm kind of oblivious to some of these technical development data, so was there a test been made in these conditions or is there some data to show it?
I'm guessing a lot of these assumptions are made because with just 100Kg of fuel they're achieving roughly the same performance they previously had with 150Kg, so with 150Kg on the current configuration it should be able to generate a lot more performance, but with no actual data to prove it. Even if it's a very long shot, I'd love to see a video of a car running in this configuration.

[Vary]

A little question here:
Some people say that the current power units could achieve the 1000hp mark they're talking about for 2017 just by removing the fuel flow limit, and that this would also increase and improve the exhaust sound. I'm kind of oblivious to some of these technical development data, so was there a test been made in these conditions or is there some data to show it?
I'm guessing a lot of these assumptions are made because with just 100Kg of fuel they're achieving roughly the same performance they previously had with 150Kg, so with 150Kg on the current configuration it should be able to generate a lot more performance, but with no actual data to prove it. Even if it's a very long shot, I'd love to see a video of a car running in this configuration.

Be cause without the fuel flow limit they'll be able to use higher boost pressure, so more power

[dren]

I think you might mean they will be able to use more fuel without the fuel limit.

[inox]

A little question here:
Some people say that the current power units could achieve the 1000hp mark they're talking about for 2017 just by removing the fuel flow limit, and that this would also increase and improve the exhaust sound. I'm kind of oblivious to some of these technical development data, so was there a test been made in these conditions or is there some data to show it?
I'm guessing a lot of these assumptions are made because with just 100Kg of fuel they're achieving roughly the same performance they previously had with 150Kg, so with 150Kg on the current configuration it should be able to generate a lot more performance, but with no actual data to prove it. Even if it's a very long shot, I'd love to see a video of a car running in this configuration.

It is quite obvious that current engines would not be able to handle 1000 Bhp without modifications. They could probably increase fuel flow slightly without reliability issues, but according to current power estimates (ICE 700 Bhp + ERS 160 Bhp) the fuel flow would need to be increased by 20% to reach the 1000 Bhp level.

[gruntguru]

The only modifications required to hit 1000 hp would be fuel system (injectors etc), cooling system and maybe pistons. The resulting ICE would not be optimised for efficiency (power) ie there would be still more power available (without further increases in fuel flow) by optimising air management componentry for the new fuel limit.

[Abarth]

The only modifications required to hit 1000 hp would be fuel system (injectors etc), cooling system and maybe pistons. The resulting ICE would not be optimised for efficiency (power) ie there would be still more power available (without further increases in fuel flow) by optimising air management componentry for the new fuel limit.

To achieve 1000 HP, agreed.

But even if the 100 kg / race are retained, the load spectrum would change considerably, not only in qualification.

To use the engines still over 5 GP's, I wouldn't be so sure structurall changes are not required. Mercedes is said to be at the limit with it's cylinder block as they seem to have spotted capillary cracks.
And they would still want to get this power at 10'500/min, so torque increase seem to suggest crankshaft modifications too.

They wouldn't be good engineers if they did not have designed these engines to the limit, and moreso the rotating/oscillating parts.

[ian_s]

if they could reliably up the power by 20% without modifying the crank, block, con rods, pistons and heads, then those parts are currently over engineered, and so must be heavier than necessary which as we all know in F1 is a big no no.
To up the power this much will probably take a massive redesign of all the PUs.

[stevesingo]

It is quite obvious that current engines would not be able to handle 1000 Bhp without modifications. They could probably increase fuel flow slightly without reliability issues, but according to current power estimates (ICE 700 Bhp + ERS 160 Bhp) the fuel flow would need to be increased by 20% to reach the 1000 Bhp level.

I don't think they will be as far away as you think.

One of the things which is really difficult to deal with from a reliability point of view is heat, and with a fuel flow limited formula, running as lean as possible does nothave the scope for adding fuel for cooling purposes. If they are running AFRs in the region of 14:1, then a change to 12.5:1 would lower combustion and exhaust temps significantly.

The added advantage of adding more fuel is that you get more mass exhaust flow at a lower temperature. This will be a benefit to MGU-H of which the generation of power is not limited by the regulations.

We could end up with a situation where we increase boost by 20% and fuel by 25% and get an extra 140hp from the ICE and as a consequence of this you are generating more power from the MGU-H directly chanelled to MGU-K allowing you to use less ES at WOT and therefore allowing the MGU-K to run at a the highest duty for more of the time. All of the time having lower combustion temps and EGT.

Altenatively, a 10% increase in fuel flow and RPM limt of 12000 would get you over 800hp from the ICE alone.

[mrluke]

Its not 20% back at the start of the season Mercedes were rumored to be in the mid 900s with Ferrari not far behind.

[Juzh]

Its not 20% back at the start of the season Mercedes were rumored to be in the mid 900s with Ferrari not far behind.

[inox]

Its not 20% back at the start of the season Mercedes were rumored to be in the mid 900s with Ferrari not far behind.

If you are really suggesting 950 hp for combined output, that is just a pretty optimistic rumor. It has been discussed earlier on this topic that figure like that is just not possible. Just too high thermal efficiency for today's technology. Scale back 100 hp or so.