2021 Engine thread

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
trinidefender
314
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:37 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by trinidefender » Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:07 am

If they do decide to drop the MGU-H then I hope they allow other technologies that have road relevance.

Mainly thinking variable valve control (lift, duration and timing) and variable nozzle turbine turbochargers.

VNT turbochargers are commonplace in diesels but are reliability limited by the high exhaust gas temperatures in petrol engines (it's my understanding that Porsche had a hell of a time trying to make theirs reliable in the 911). Development in this field will have direct applications for use in petrol road engines. Lastly they will reduce the lag that will inevitably accompany the loss of the MGU-H.

Variable valve control....well I'm pretty sure the benefits of developing that are apparent to everybody

johnny comelately
7
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by johnny comelately » Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:21 am

trinidefender wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:07 am
If they do decide to drop the MGU-H then I hope they allow other technologies that have road relevance.

Mainly thinking variable valve control (lift, duration and timing) and variable nozzle turbine turbochargers.

VNT turbochargers are commonplace in diesels but are reliability limited by the high exhaust gas temperatures in petrol engines (it's my understanding that Porsche had a hell of a time trying to make theirs reliable in the 911). Development in this field will have direct applications for use in petrol road engines. Lastly they will reduce the lag that will inevitably accompany the loss of the MGU-H.

Variable valve control....well I'm pretty sure the benefits of developing that are apparent to everybody
Just on the turbo subject, koenigsegg seem have a good design but no idea how good it is?

Singabule
27
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:47 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by Singabule » Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:26 am

Koenisegg free valve technology do you mean? It is not reliable yet and cost a lot of energy. F1 dont need something like that, we only need vtec or vvti form.

AJI
34
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:08 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by AJI » Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:28 am

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:10 pm
petrol-electric it is then !! - with a 1600cc 'range-extender'
That's the most confusing part about the 110kg of fuel for 2019 suggestion?
It can't be a 'range-extender', it can't be an ICE 'power-extender', so it has to be for motoring against the K as an 'E-extender'.

MrPotatoHead
55
User avatar
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:03 pm
Location: All over.

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by MrPotatoHead » Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:11 am

Singabule wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:26 am
Koenisegg free valve technology do you mean? It is not reliable yet and cost a lot of energy. F1 dont need something like that, we only need vtec or vvti form.
Freevalve is also far from being able to run at high rpm aka F1 levels.
I don’t believe they can even run over 6,000 rpm yet.

Singabule
27
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:47 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by Singabule » Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:11 am

MrPotatoHead wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:11 am
Singabule wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:26 am
Koenisegg free valve technology do you mean? It is not reliable yet and cost a lot of energy. F1 dont need something like that, we only need vtec or vvti form.
Freevalve is also far from being able to run at high rpm aka F1 levels.
I don’t believe they can even run over 6,000 rpm yet.
Spring valve still good untill 13K rpm, unless they want engine to reviving to 15 K or 18K the variable technology cost still bearable. One question, could we design variable desmodromic valve to increase rpm? Also with current pneumatic valve, the timing can be adjusted, but is it possible to adjust lift also?

henry
212
User avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by henry » Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:09 am

Surely with a turbocharged engine the manufacturers will only run high revs if they are instructed to by regulation. Similarly high cylinder count.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

Singabule
27
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:47 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by Singabule » Wed Apr 18, 2018 9:04 am

henry wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:09 am
Surely with a turbocharged engine the manufacturers will only run high revs if they are instructed to by regulation. Similarly high cylinder count.
Yes, the increase in rpm is discussed to improve sound. However there is no further detail how much the increase is, i think 15k still the target from FIA

Xwang
9
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:12 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by Xwang » Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:01 pm

Why don't they simple say that MGU-H is not mandated and not forbidden so that if someone wants to keep it, he can do?

NL_Fer
54
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by NL_Fer » Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:25 pm

Xwang wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:01 pm
Why don't they simple say that MGU-H is not mandated and not forbidden so that if someone wants to keep it, he can do?
Honda had an MGU-H which was a little less efficient than the others. They were already sitting ducks on the straight. The cars without will be less powerfull and taking 20kg more fuel at the start.

On the rev, if they keep the fuel flow limiters, i hope they will increase the limit with rising revs. So if it is 100kg/hr, it must be like 100kg at 15000rpm, 80kg at 12000rpm, 60kg at 9000rpm etc...

johnny comelately
7
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by johnny comelately » Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:41 am

Xwang wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:01 pm
Why don't they simple say that MGU-H is not mandated and not forbidden so that if someone wants to keep it, he can do?
agreed

AJI
34
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:08 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by AJI » Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:03 am

Xwang wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:01 pm
Why don't they simple say that MGU-H is not mandated and not forbidden so that if someone wants to keep it, he can do?
With different fuel flow rates and quantity for BoP, maybe...

Big Tea
59
User avatar
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by Big Tea » Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:55 am

johnny comelately wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:41 am
Xwang wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:01 pm
Why don't they simple say that MGU-H is not mandated and not forbidden so that if someone wants to keep it, he can do?
agreed
The thing with this though is the teams could spend huge amounts on developing the units while not even using them.
If it came out of the F1 teams 'cap' if it comes about or if it is factory spend, it is still money used for the F1 program which some will spend and compel a new engine entry to include in the budget.
One test is worth a thousand expert opinions

godlameroso
335
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by godlameroso » Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:07 pm

I still think it should be a V12, nothing sounds better than a V12 IMO.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

roon
439
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by roon » Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:40 pm

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:10 pm
petrol-electric it is then !! - with a 1600cc 'range-extender'
Full electric + i.c.e. exhaust noise generator of any cylinder arrangement. Smaller fuel tank limits the dead weight. No mechanical load should allow one engine per season. Relevant to industry trends, while continuing development of nostalgic technologies.