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

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by MrPotatoHead » Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:20 pm

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.
I just saw the comment you were replying to - he was talking about the Koenigsegg turbo valve.
Essentially a Quick Spool valve that is built into the turbo housing (3D printed) that when closed reduces the apparent AR of the housing thus decreasing turbo spool time.

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

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by MrPotatoHead » Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:23 pm


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

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by Singabule » Sat Apr 21, 2018 3:20 am

MrPotatoHead wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:23 pm
https://youtu.be/DNedUZxP8NU
Wow thanks, this is new product from them, i dont know this is exist before. So basically twin scroll turbo with variable valve between one and other scroll to reduce back pressure utilizing 3D print technique on steel. It should be more reliable than variable vane because fewer moving parts inside the turbine. Yes i agree this could reduce lag, however in expense of reliability and turbine aerodinamics. I prefer use old big turbine with greater efficiency and fill torque using MGUK

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

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by MrPotatoHead » Sat Apr 21, 2018 3:26 am

Yeah it’s basically a built in version of this:

https://www.suprastore.com/spquspva.html

FW17
222
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by FW17 » Mon Apr 23, 2018 2:38 pm

I do not understand why the engine formula for 2021 is being closed out now, with the dead line set as May 2018

What is the point of giving manufacturers close to 2.5 years? This is just too much of a commitment for manufacturers.

Ideally it should be done in December 2019 so that they have just 12 months and manufacturers who are committing late are not disadvantaged.

CriXus
94
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 6:09 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by CriXus » Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:29 pm

60% Efficiency ICE without Hybrid System
"Without music, life would be an error!!!" - Friedrich Nietzsche

tcooper27
7
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by tcooper27 » Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:52 pm

FW17 wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 2:38 pm
I do not understand why the engine formula for 2021 is being closed out now, with the dead line set as May 2018

What is the point of giving manufacturers close to 2.5 years? This is just too much of a commitment for manufacturers.

Ideally it should be done in December 2019 so that they have just 12 months and manufacturers who are committing late are not disadvantaged.
Budgets are one reason. Most companies that are big enough to have the spare cash to compete plan for this kind of ongoing expenditure years in advance. Very few companies are going to commit late to a $150+ million/year project.

godlameroso
337
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by godlameroso » Mon Apr 23, 2018 5:29 pm

CriXus wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:29 pm
60% Efficiency ICE without Hybrid System
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCr6bjQMrgU
I posted about this engine last year 8) glad he made a video about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VoiD4P ... IfVB5DoYYp

Here Rolf Reitz(one of the main brains behind this engine) gives his week long lecture explaining his work on RCCI in excruciatingly boring detail. Lots of good insights if you manage to sit through it all the way. He goes over the CFD used in developing it, the things they found, the models used, etc. Just the CFD aspect and the modeling was the most eye opening stuff.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

FW17
222
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by FW17 » Mon Apr 23, 2018 5:35 pm

tcooper27 wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:52 pm
FW17 wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 2:38 pm
I do not understand why the engine formula for 2021 is being closed out now, with the dead line set as May 2018

What is the point of giving manufacturers close to 2.5 years? This is just too much of a commitment for manufacturers.

Ideally it should be done in December 2019 so that they have just 12 months and manufacturers who are committing late are not disadvantaged.
Budgets are one reason. Most companies that are big enough to have the spare cash to compete plan for this kind of ongoing expenditure years in advance. Very few companies are going to commit late to a $150+ million/year project.
It is too much of a head start to current manufacturers.

godlameroso
337
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by godlameroso » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:06 pm

We still don't know the details about the engine. Even if it's a turbo V6 I still think the engine block, and rods should be standardized, let the manufacturers figure out the heads crank and pistons, and the lower block. Standardize the cam phasing mechanism and allow variable timing,but no variable lift profiles. Variable geometry turbo and exhaust. Standardized pneumatic valve system. This along with chopping the MGU-H should make the engines substantially cheaper, but still allow the manufacturers to put their own take on the concept. The engine should make roughly ~730hp or like the old V8 engines, the hybrid system should be good for 200+kw. Deployment and recovery should be controlled by the driver, the rate of both deployment and recovery should be variable.

One way would be to have two wheel mounted triggers which deploy through the front wheels. Or a push to pass with different settings, and a BBW which harvests at the rate the driver selects if the plan is to keep it RWD.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

CriXus
94
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 6:09 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by CriXus » Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:03 pm

godlameroso wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:06 pm
We still don't know the details about the engine. Even if it's a turbo V6 I still think the engine block, and rods should be standardized, let the manufacturers figure out the heads crank and pistons, and the lower block. Standardize the cam phasing mechanism and allow variable timing,but no variable lift profiles. Variable geometry turbo and exhaust. Standardized pneumatic valve system. This along with chopping the MGU-H should make the engines substantially cheaper, but still allow the manufacturers to put their own take on the concept. The engine should make roughly ~730hp or like the old V8 engines, the hybrid system should be good for 200+kw. Deployment and recovery should be controlled by the driver, the rate of both deployment and recovery should be variable.

One way would be to have two wheel mounted triggers which deploy through the front wheels. Or a push to pass with different settings, and a BBW which harvests at the rate the driver selects if the plan is to keep it RWD.
I do not understand why no one is mentioning some kind of push to pass. Let's say from these 200kw in the race you have 150kw + 50kw available for some time.
"Without music, life would be an error!!!" - Friedrich Nietzsche

godlameroso
337
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by godlameroso » Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:12 pm

CriXus wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:03 pm
godlameroso wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:06 pm
We still don't know the details about the engine. Even if it's a turbo V6 I still think the engine block, and rods should be standardized, let the manufacturers figure out the heads crank and pistons, and the lower block. Standardize the cam phasing mechanism and allow variable timing,but no variable lift profiles. Variable geometry turbo and exhaust. Standardized pneumatic valve system. This along with chopping the MGU-H should make the engines substantially cheaper, but still allow the manufacturers to put their own take on the concept. The engine should make roughly ~730hp or like the old V8 engines, the hybrid system should be good for 200+kw. Deployment and recovery should be controlled by the driver, the rate of both deployment and recovery should be variable.

One way would be to have two wheel mounted triggers which deploy through the front wheels. Or a push to pass with different settings, and a BBW which harvests at the rate the driver selects if the plan is to keep it RWD.
I do not understand why no one is mentioning some kind of push to pass. Let's say from these 200kw in the race you have 150kw + 50kw available for some time.
Well seeing as how the next gen formula E cars have 200kW race motors, F1 should also have 200kW KERS units. So I agree if the push to pass is 250kW :twisted:
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

NL_Fer
59
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by NL_Fer » Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:00 pm

But how to charge the ES for those push to pass actions? With brake harvesting alone, there will be less than 10s “kers boost” available per lap.

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

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by AJI » Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:11 pm

NL_Fer wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:00 pm
But how to charge the ES for those push to pass actions? With brake harvesting alone, there will be less than 10s “kers boost” available per lap.
Remove down force so they have to use the brakes more?
Motoring against the K is another way, but that seems counterintuitive to me

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

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post by MrPotatoHead » Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:11 pm

NL_Fer wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:00 pm
But how to charge the ES for those push to pass actions? With brake harvesting alone, there will be less than 10s “kers boost” available per lap.
The same way they do in LMP - by using the front axle as well as the rear axle to harvest.