Mclaren Honda 2015

[diffuser]

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.

This sounds very plausible, I think it is true.

The MGU-K harvests ONLY under braking. You can be decelerating without braking at which point you could be harvesting from the MGU-H.

[diffuser]

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.

You really think that the turbines get spooled by the MGU-H often? They're constantly running at above 7k RPM. They can easily drop down a gear to get/keep the RPMs up.

[henry]

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.

This sounds very plausible, I think it is true.

The MGU-K harvests ONLY under braking. You can be decelerating without braking at which point you could be harvesting from the MGU-H.

Strictly speaking you can be harvesting from the MGU-K AND accelerating. The MGU-K can apply a negative torque to the crankshaft. If this torque is higher than that coming from the ICE the car will decelerate. If the torque is lower the car will still accelerate. In both cases energy goes to the ES.

I believe they may use the latter to charge to the full 2MJ in a lap in preparation for a qualifying lap. At most tracks braking alone is not 2MJ. You need at least 16.5 seconds braking at 160Kw to achieve that.

[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 ?

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


thanks for that ; whatever the drafter meant , legally 2015 is a calendar year so if honda so wanted they could take their time and use their tokens by 31st december if they felt they could get a better end result by then ...2015 being a write off the best possible start to 2016 is a logical approach
However it proved to be inconclusive as it only states year figures, 'in 2015', etc., rather than a duration/period for a year.

[Tommy Cookers]

The MGU-K harvests ONLY under braking. You can be decelerating without braking at which point you could be harvesting from the MGU-H.

Strictly speaking you can be harvesting from the MGU-K AND accelerating. The MGU-K can apply a negative torque to the crankshaft. If this torque is higher than that coming from the ICE the car will decelerate. If the torque is lower the car will still accelerate. In both cases energy goes to the ES.
I believe they may use the latter to charge to the full 2MJ in a lap in preparation for a qualifying lap. At most tracks braking alone is not 2MJ. You need at least 16.5 seconds braking at 160Kw to achieve that.

is the car allowed to generate from the mgu-k other than when the accelerator is in the 0% demand position ??
whenever at 0% accelerator the crankshaft is allowed to deliver 120 kw if the gu-k action is 120 kW and so absorbs this fully
ie the overrun torque cannot be greater than zero
so this will top-up the delivery to the ES

[henry]

is the car allowed to generate from the mgu-k other than when the accelerator is in the 0% demand position ??
whenever at 0% accelerator the crankshaft is allowed to deliver 120 kw if the gu-k action is 120 kW and so absorbs this fully
ie the overrun torque cannot be greater than zero
so this will top-up the delivery to the ES

I think it is possible but I can't find anything in the regs. I did find a press conference http://www.fia.com/news/f1-race-directo ... l-briefing from Australia 2014 with some stuff on fuel saving:

"‘Lift and coast’

If the torque management system on the car decides to go into a fuel-save mode, the rear light will flash for a second to warn any driver behind. The thresholds are configurable but currently set for a car above 95 per cent throttle for more than a second, travelling faster than 180kph, that experiences a torque reduction of 120kW or more.

The warning system has been created because these events are controlled by the electronics rather than by the driver. If the driver decides to back off early then the situation is as it always has been. He has a responsibility to ensure another car is not close behind him. It’s as simple as that. One would normally expect the driver to check that it’s OK to back off. The warning light is there for situations not controlled by the driver."'

If the torque (sic) reduction can be more than 120Kw then, perhaps, the MGU-K could be generating a negative torque and charging the ES.

[PlatinumZealot]

Yes it is more efficient to charge the ES when no fuel is being burnt. Basically any time where a negative torque is available: Lift and coast.. Braking.. Downhill..

The mguh is charged during moments of available torque from the turbine. In boost limiting, and lift and coast and sometimes engine braking.

The honda turbine spins too fast during boost limiting so the excess gasses are sent through the wastegate. The high back pressure nd resulting heat is also another problem. There is little honda can do about this right now so they will wait till next year fix the fundamental flaws.

[Thunder]

Team Preview - Monza
http://www.mclaren.com/formula1/2015/it ... x-preview/

[Wazari]

I have been able to look at the layouts of the Honda, Ferrari and Renaults PU's. Unfortunately couldn't get my hands on the Merc unit, at least not yet. All three are different and Honda's does seem to more complex. I am trying to get a grasp in my head of how to make the energy recovery most efficient from both the MGU H and K units. This not something I studied in engineering close to 40 years ago. I did study turbocharging theory, design and played a role in designing the turbo layout for the 1.5 L V6 engine of the 80's. That was relatively easy compared to what is being done today.

I am trying to figure out what Honda's true difficulty is. What some of your are saying is making my head spin. In theory energy recovery is a relatively simple concept. I think where Honda is having trouble, (this is pure speculation on my part) is the transition phase of the MGU-H unit when it goes from motor phase to generator phase. It seems to me that upon point of acceleration, the MGU-H unit is not feeding the MGU-K unit fast enough or at all. So I think what is happening is that the energy from the MGU-H unit at this critical point is neither feeding the MGU-K unit nor charging the ES unit sufficiently. I think this is what needs to be resolved above anything else. This to me would be a basic design issue and/or software issue. It appears to be again a simple fix in theory but obviously complex in implementation.

Lastly, I don't think turbine size plays a factor in this. There is a lot more to the physical size of the turbine that plays into the function of the turbocharger. Vane design, (number of vanes, vane pitch, curvature, vane weight to shaft weight ratio, etc.) are all important factors rather than the overall physical dimensions of the turbine itself.

[Thunder]

The user muramasa over at the Autosprt Forums does a great Job translating Arai's Interviews in the Japanese Media, here's his summary of the Spa Weekend:

"Arai quotes (all bullet parts) and info (where specified ) from Spa on Japanese language source
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67414
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67468
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67514
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67600
http://sportiva.shue...f1_94/index.php
also F1 sokuho


on PU
[note that these are mishmash of quotes out of different contexts as well as from different days (mostly unsure when exactly)]


- At the point of the beginning of summer break period shortly after Hungary, it has been decided that introducing the upgrade using all 7 tokens for Spa had to be abandoned / given up. (info in article. usually I be careful to pass these unquoted info but quite specific so just as a reference. remember that this is un-sourced.)

- Arai at Spa (on Thursday) looked somber/downbeat (due to upgrade being not major one as planned) (info in articles: impression by the writer)

-At Hungaroring, the amount of harvested energy exceeded the amount of release/usage so there was no need to worry about deployment management, but at Spa there should be shortage no matter how we calculate, which itself must be same for not just Honda but also for other makers.

-many things happened and due to circumstance it turned out we could only use 3 tokens after all, so no massive update and we cannot expect much on performance here

-changes made to; combustion chamber, air intake (plenum), exhaust layout, cooling

-Aim is to alter combustion concept/characteristics and pursue more effective combustion in order to increase the output, we only made some changes to relevant parts here and there, so the change is not that drastic yet. Combustion chamber is the set of components like engine head, block and pistons, so one alteration comes with so many things to be checked/verified, which takes a lot of time. If possible, we would have liked to introduce all 7 tokens here at Spa, but there are many things left unchecked yet, so we decided to put in 3 tokens. There was report "exceeding Ferrari", but it's impossible to expect it here. We are considering one more push somewhere in the second half of the season.

-output level-wise, we could confirm from torque sensor that the figure seen on track is matching the figure on dynamometer

-In terms of output, our PU is certainly more powerful than Renault's. Some articles wrote "output hasnt increased despite upgrade", but that's not the case. We have output power, but are unable to connect/turn the output to lap time, to make the car go faster. In terms of competition where it's about fast or slow, it's true that we are disappointing our fans, but the issue is separate from combustion concept that's been upgraded this time.

-We are not able to use the power effectively to make the car run fast. The issue is total amount of energy available, it could be for example that regeneration at MGU-H not enough as one thing, and energy deployment management being insufficient as another. Spa is the track where it's extremely difficult for PU to get energy recovery&deployment right as you gain a lot of lap time at uphill parts here.

-Monza has even higher rate of full throttle than Spa, so we reckon we should not expect much there. Absolute output power alone does not make lap time, so considering today's situation (race), we're prepared that it will be severe. In terms of recovery energy, it will be even tougher at Monza than here at Spa.

-Regarding how to use remaining tokens, we think we have to make final decision by Italian GP, but we are in the middle of pondering strategy for Suzuka. Basically we would like to make our PU more competitive by improving ICE and increasing the engine power further. It would be nice if we could provide positive topics for Suzuka, but at this very moment we cannot say anything for certain yet.


Friday
-We have made changes to chassis on aero too, so there were many items to check. Were affected by interruptions of 3 red flags in FPs as well. Also telemetry went down once during running. So we were not able to complete the menu we had planned to carry out.

-Unable to make satisfactory verification on those modified(tokenized) parts of PU, so couldnt reach the stage where we work on deployment.


FP3
-(on Alonso's exhaust issue) We've modified exhaust as well along the changes made to ICE, but we dont think the cause is the new ICE. Most likely manufacturing issue on exhaust.


Race
-(on the new reg on race start procedure) There's no worry, no advice necessary for our experienced drivers

-(on JB's deployment issue) We have to investigate to find out what happened, but it could be data setting on energy charge, or MGU-H temp increased and generation decreased. Whatever it is, it wasnt hardware issue, and the issue was only temporary.

-We knew how the race would be like from Q1 result, but still it was tough race.

-There was no issue on fuel consumption"

[trinidefender]

I have been able to look at the layouts of the Honda, Ferrari and Renaults PU's. Unfortunately couldn't get my hands on the Merc unit, at least not yet. All three are different and Honda's does seem to more complex. I am trying to get a grasp in my head of how to make the energy recovery most efficient from both the MGU H and K units. This not something I studied in engineering close to 40 years ago. I did study turbocharging theory, design and played a role in designing the turbo layout for the 1.5 L V6 engine of the 80's. That was relatively easy compared to what is being done today.

I am trying to figure out what Honda's true difficulty is. What some of your are saying is making my head spin. In theory energy recovery is a relatively simple concept. I think where Honda is having trouble, (this is pure speculation on my part) is the transition phase of the MGU-H unit when it goes from motor phase to generator phase. It seems to me that upon point of acceleration, the MGU-H unit is not feeding the MGU-K unit fast enough or at all. So I think what is happening is that the energy from the MGU-H unit at this critical point is neither feeding the MGU-K unit nor charging the ES unit sufficiently. I think this is what needs to be resolved above anything else. This to me would be a basic design issue and/or software issue. It appears to be again a simple fix in theory but obviously complex in implementation.

Lastly, I don't think turbine size plays a factor in this. There is a lot more to the physical size of the turbine that plays into the function of the turbocharger. Vane design, (number of vanes, vane pitch, curvature, vane weight to shaft weight ratio, etc.) are all important factors rather than the overall physical dimensions of the turbine itself.

When we were talking about "turbine size" it wasn't necessarily to be taken literally. A more accurate description range should be a that Hona may be using a turbine that has an efficiency range based off of powering the compressor and may be making to much back pressure and/or simply not able (outside its efficiency range) for powering both the compressor and generating any useful electrical current from the MGU-H. I think the word size was used because it is what people can see and one of the few variables that people may have a chance to actually be exposed to.

While I wouldn't say it is untrue I have my doubts that Honda is having problems with the switching from motor to generator modes. Firstly because that if that were the case I would think they would have been able to fix it by now. They wouldn't leave such a big problem that could be fixed with a software fix so long. Secondly on the helicopter that I fly the motor/generator unit on each turboshaft engine can switch from being a motor for startup to a generator in a fraction of a second. I know a fraction of a second is an eternity in F1 however it should still leave many seconds of charging time and should yield better overall ERS performance than currently shown.

I actually do believe that Arai is talking purely about the ICE when he says they are 25bhp better than the Renault unit, I also do believe that the Honda PU is slightly more powerful than the Renault PU. Alas The way this generation of PU's are set up, they are very heavily ERS dependant.

I think the idea of Honda using an axial turbine is still very probable. The idea of an axle compressor is still laughable in my head as no technology yet in the public domain has even come close to the characteristics required for this application. If they are in fact using an axle turbine then the efficiency range (the shape of efficiency lines on a massflow vs PR graph) would be different even if they have the same maximum maximum efficiency point. This would have an impact on how well the turbine can drive both the compressor and the MGU-H in generator mode.

[Cannonballer]

The user muramasa over at the Autosprt Forums does a great Job translating Arai's Interviews in the Japanese Media, here's his summary of the Spa Weekend:

"Arai quotes (all bullet parts) and info (where specified ) from Spa on Japanese language source
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67414
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67468
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67514
http://as-web.jp/new...c_id=1&no=67600
http://sportiva.shue...f1_94/index.php
also F1 sokuho


on PU
[note that these are mishmash of quotes out of different contexts as well as from different days (mostly unsure when exactly)]


- At the point of the beginning of summer break period shortly after Hungary, it has been decided that introducing the upgrade using all 7 tokens for Spa had to be abandoned / given up. (info in article. usually I be careful to pass these unquoted info but quite specific so just as a reference. remember that this is un-sourced.)

- Arai at Spa (on Thursday) looked somber/downbeat (due to upgrade being not major one as planned) (info in articles: impression by the writer)

-At Hungaroring, the amount of harvested energy exceeded the amount of release/usage so there was no need to worry about deployment management, but at Spa there should be shortage no matter how we calculate, which itself must be same for not just Honda but also for other makers.

-many things happened and due to circumstance it turned out we could only use 3 tokens after all, so no massive update and we cannot expect much on performance here

-changes made to; combustion chamber, air intake (plenum), exhaust layout, cooling

-Aim is to alter combustion concept/characteristics and pursue more effective combustion in order to increase the output, we only made some changes to relevant parts here and there, so the change is not that drastic yet. Combustion chamber is the set of components like engine head, block and pistons, so one alteration comes with so many things to be checked/verified, which takes a lot of time. If possible, we would have liked to introduce all 7 tokens here at Spa, but there are many things left unchecked yet, so we decided to put in 3 tokens. There was report "exceeding Ferrari", but it's impossible to expect it here. We are considering one more push somewhere in the second half of the season.

-output level-wise, we could confirm from torque sensor that the figure seen on track is matching the figure on dynamometer

-In terms of output, our PU is certainly more powerful than Renault's. Some articles wrote "output hasnt increased despite upgrade", but that's not the case. We have output power, but are unable to connect/turn the output to lap time, to make the car go faster. In terms of competition where it's about fast or slow, it's true that we are disappointing our fans, but the issue is separate from combustion concept that's been upgraded this time.

-We are not able to use the power effectively to make the car run fast. The issue is total amount of energy available, it could be for example that regeneration at MGU-H not enough as one thing, and energy deployment management being insufficient as another. Spa is the track where it's extremely difficult for PU to get energy recovery&deployment right as you gain a lot of lap time at uphill parts here.

-Monza has even higher rate of full throttle than Spa, so we reckon we should not expect much there. Absolute output power alone does not make lap time, so considering today's situation (race), we're prepared that it will be severe. In terms of recovery energy, it will be even tougher at Monza than here at Spa.

-Regarding how to use remaining tokens, we think we have to make final decision by Italian GP, but we are in the middle of pondering strategy for Suzuka. Basically we would like to make our PU more competitive by improving ICE and increasing the engine power further. It would be nice if we could provide positive topics for Suzuka, but at this very moment we cannot say anything for certain yet.


Friday
-We have made changes to chassis on aero too, so there were many items to check. Were affected by interruptions of 3 red flags in FPs as well. Also telemetry went down once during running. So we were not able to complete the menu we had planned to carry out.

-Unable to make satisfactory verification on those modified(tokenized) parts of PU, so couldnt reach the stage where we work on deployment.


FP3
-(on Alonso's exhaust issue) We've modified exhaust as well along the changes made to ICE, but we dont think the cause is the new ICE. Most likely manufacturing issue on exhaust.


Race
-(on the new reg on race start procedure) There's no worry, no advice necessary for our experienced drivers

-(on JB's deployment issue) We have to investigate to find out what happened, but it could be data setting on energy charge, or MGU-H temp increased and generation decreased. Whatever it is, it wasnt hardware issue, and the issue was only temporary.

-We knew how the race would be like from Q1 result, but still it was tough race.

-There was no issue on fuel consumption"

From these translations Arai's statements seem pretty reasonable. I was beginning to wonder if he (Honda) had lost touch with reality given some of the quotes attributed to him (them). Really goes a long way towards restoring my respect for, and confidence, in Honda.

[Wazari]

So these layouts are incorrect?

[trinidefender]

http://encdn.f1i.com/wp-content/uploads ... son-EN.jpg

So these layouts are incorrect?

Do we know where that image came from. To me it looks like a simple artists mockup of what things could be like.

People like to talk about the axial compressor idea because it hasn't been used before and it sounds fancy yet even up to now nobody has been able to show me an axial compressor, research or otherwise, that even comes close to providing the required PR increase through one stage as required by regulations.

The axial turbine is actually possible and from what I've seen looks like a viable alternative. Maybe you can send your nephew the image and ask if he can say if the image depicted looks similar to the actual Honda unit. If he can confirm that no, that is not how it is set up then he hasn't actually given anything away, he has just simply confirmed that the image is wrong?

[Wazari]

http://encdn.f1i.com/wp-content/uploads ... son-EN.jpg

So these layouts are incorrect?

Do we know where that image came from. To me it looks like a simple artists mockup of what things could be like.

People like to talk about the axial compressor idea because it hasn't been used before and it sounds fancy yet even up to now nobody has been able to show me an axial compressor, research or otherwise, that even comes close to providing the required PR increase through one stage as required by regulations.

The axial turbine is actually possible and from what I've seen looks like a viable alternative. Maybe you can send your nephew the image and ask if he can say if the image depicted looks similar to the actual Honda unit. If he can confirm that no, that is not how it is set up then he hasn't actually given anything away, he has just simply confirmed that the image is wrong?

I already have asked my nephew. All he said to me was that the image of Honda's PU is somewhere between 95 to 99% accurate. I think that is all he really can say.