2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[Blackout]

So the bore and stroke are set, the number and inline configuration of the cylinders, also set.

I hope this question is not as dumb as it sounds, but can an i4 be laid down on it's side to get the weight as low possible?

I also have to wonder if supercharging will be allowed.

Good questions.
Any answer ?

[WhiteBlue]

So the bore and stroke are set, the number and inline configuration of the cylinders, also set.

I hope this question is not as dumb as it sounds, but can an i4 be laid down on it's side to get the weight as low possible?

I also have to wonder if supercharging will be allowed.

Good questions.
Any answer ?

Has been done at least partially and can be done. The point is you loose the slimness of the engine if you lay it totally flat and this compromises your aerodynamic packaging.

[Blackout]

Yes...
Or an inclined engine like the Brabham (BT 54 ? 55 ?) M12es...
Thanks

[ringo]

The engine simply has to be shaped like an "I" beam.
It's best the engine does not lay flat. Now that we have KERS, that will be a packaging problem.
When it's flat, it's basically like the V8. Though it has C.O.G. benefits...

Flatter also means less stiff. That VW engine is vertical, with an I cross section. So it will be very stiff.

I notice the flywheels as well, i suppose these will be back on the 4 cylinders.

[Blackout]

F3 air intake and exhausts


FR air intake and exhausts



What about the exhausts ? and the EDB ? no more EDB for 2013 ?

I notice the flywheels as well, i suppose these will be back on the 4 cylinders.

Yes Patrick Head supposes the same thing...

[747heavy]

you can lay a I4 engine completly flat.

one example which comes to mind, would be a BMW K100 motor bike engine, which where also used in the Formula BMW race cars.





I don´t think, that it is the best solution in terms of CoG height.
We will need to see, what aero and chassis reg´s come with the engine in 2013, you may want the space at the sides of your engine to run up your venturi tunnels on both sides.
Another point would be, if they define a CoG height for the engine and/or min. crankshaft height again in F1.

[Blackout]

We will need to see, what aero and chassis reg´s come with the engine in 2013, you may wont the space at the sides of your engine to run up your venturi tunnels on both sides.

Oh yes exactly. I forgot the possible return of GE...

[Blackout]

Presumably the intake should be located in a high pressure leading edge, to reduce pressure drag under throttle. If the roll hoop/blade has to stay, then a thin perimeter slit on its leading face could open into a inner cavity piped to the turbo. No need to make it one big void if it doesn't need to be, the goal being reducing frontal area.

The lips of the radiator inlets could be another option. Or a central duct above the tea tray, right below the driver's legs.

A large perforated surface through which the turbo ingests air could reduce the thickness of the boundary layer on many different components.

Realistically, though, I see a return to NACA ducts as Giblet mentioned.

I hope the airbox/roll hoop configuration will remain... but that intake would be far from the turbo, wouldn't it ?
Do you think the teams will choose something similar to the B186 ?





And how many turbos will they use ? can they split the exhausts ?
And how big do you think the intercooler will be ?

[Blackout]

The Naca solution:

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/8181/5 ... ambt55.gif

[WhiteBlue]

The engine simply has to be shaped like an "I" beam. It's best the engine does not lay flat. Now that we have KERS, that will be a packaging problem. When it's flat, it's basically like the V8. Though it has C.O.G. benefits...Flatter also means less stiff. That VW engine is vertical, with an I cross section. So it will be very stiff.

+1 I agree with your view and Baretzky's. Vertical L4 with single turbo for charging and compounding is probably the best solution. The benetton had a flat floor and no tunnels. They were already outlawed at that time. But for 2013 they will probably be back. There will probably be additional TERS stuff that will need space the side of the engine.

Great find jumbo! I have never seen an FBMW sans body work. I'm riding the K75 three cylinder version of that engine for twenty years now. It runs smooth as a turbine.

[autogyro]

How about a flat 2/4 cylinder opposed 4 piston electric supercharged two stroke with turbo generator. No cylinder head and no poppet valves!
You might get away with 4/8 cylinders even.
I gaurantee more power, better efficiency and the best sound ever heard in F1.

http://www.sa.hillman.org.au/TS3.htm

A 2/4 cylinder version of the above built into the tub.

[WhiteBlue]

AG, the decision is made, and the moderators closed the thread "What happens after the 2.4L V8". So alternative concepts are off topic now. I suggest you start an alternative concept thread for such proposals.

[autogyro]

But it is an inline four WB and could have the same cylinder dimensions.

[Giblet]

I think we need to make some general assumptions, and these being that at the very least, the old rules will apply to the new engine. They are going to have some tight restrictions as well as some open areas.

Current things in the regs

-angle of cylinders/pistons (Can an inline have an angle? What in reference to?)
-Only 4 stroke
-Cylinder layout and cylinder shape
-number and type of valves
-cylinder bore
-cylinder spacing
-minimum crankshaft height above reference plane
-minimum weight
-COG

Some of these might be dropped, but these new rules might be as or more restrictive than now.

[ringo]

Good point, i think all those areas will be covered.
Even though the engine layout has changed all those safety concerns still apply.

There are other creative ideas a team or manufacturer can up with though.

Look on this:

This looks like it has a bigger foot print than a V8.

Teams will be looking to address this issue. It's a smaller package but a bigger footprint.
In F1 it seems that the V8 is actually a tighter package than a 4 cylinder turbo.

Though one side of the car will be roomier, the intake side, it's pretty hard to figure out what to put there, since more than likely anything that goes there will be high.

The ferrari package is better, since the turbo is within the footprint of the engine, but i don't know if having the intake side facing the ground is goood for the air flow. The air charge will have to flow upward into the cylinders. The BMW is the opposite, the intake manifold is on top. and the engine leans over on the turbos.