2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:06 pm
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

WhiteBlue wrote: ...
I have read the article and it says that the single exhaust pipe will have to end 180 mm behind the rear axle, centrally placed in the middle and with 5° upward direction.
...
Oh mama, that seems to become a looong xhaust pipe, like some 500 mm perhaps?
WhiteBlue wrote: ...
And this one answers xpensive's question regarding race fuel allocation:
FiA WMSC wrote:No car may use more than 100kg of fuel for the race, from the time the lights go out at the start of the race to the chequered flag. This will be monitored by the use of an FIA approved fuel flow meter.
...
I'm glad we got that one straightened out, taken to the bank so to speak.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

User avatar
dren
222
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:
dren wrote:This goes to support the idea that the teams really do not recorver energy through braking but by engine overrrun now.
Obviously you have to use the KERS MGU to harvest energy with this years cars. I thought that negative torque to the rear wheels is the same as braking. How do you come to the conclusion that they do not brake? It sounds very unlikely to me. Are the teams really harvesting with KERS only during engine over run? That would mean they have to activate the KERS harvesting by some clever programming without a brake input from the driver. Please elaborate and give us some details.
I thought - and I may be wrong - from reading past comments on here that the engine was overrun during braking so there was no actual engine braking, so essentially 0 motor torque, and all actual braking was done by the brakes.

Now there will be engine braking, which is really KERS braking, from the driveshaft along with the brakes.
Honda!

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:58 pm
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

I think the new thing is more the way the brakes are controlled. Today they are not powered and there is no mapping between the brake pedal and the friction brakes. Only the KERS system is electronically controlled to mesh with the torque from the friction brakes. Next year there will be a brake-by-wire design where a computer will control both sources of torque. It means that the amount of friction brake torque will not be controlled by the driver any more.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

muhammadtalha-13
muhammadtalha-13
-2
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

Is there a chance of Lotus switching to Merc' Engines?
1. Renault engine is quite expensive as compared to Merc'.
2. Lotus is not very strong financially like RedBull to happily buy Renault Engines.
3. Merc' requested (i don't know if it was a request or whatever) FIA to allow the manufacturers to sell their engines to at least four teams. Now they have got three. who the 4th one might be?

Renault have shown their intentions to reduce their engine supply to three teams. Toro Rosso and Red bull deals are done. Now it's either Caterham or Lotus. Marussia are likely to go for a Ferrari Engine if they decide to stay in F1.
OR - Could it be another team coming in next year?

Neno
Neno
-29
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 12:41 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

muhammadtalha-13 wrote:Is there a chance of Lotus switching to Merc' Engines?
1. Renault engine is quite expensive as compared to Merc'.
2. Lotus is not very strong financially like RedBull to happily buy Renault Engines.
3. Merc' requested (i don't know if it was a request or whatever) FIA to allow the manufacturers to sell their engines to at least four teams. Now they have got three. who the 4th one might be?

Renault have shown their intentions to reduce their engine supply to three teams. Toro Rosso and Red bull deals are done. Now it's either Caterham or Lotus. Marussia are likely to go for a Ferrari Engine if they decide to stay in F1.
first if marussia have money for engines then lotus have also. second we dont know real prices of engines for 2014, everything is just speculation. Also every team who is not constructor will pay for their engines (this includes lotus), so why lotus would change engine manufacturer if they are happy with current product. Also renault should be also happy to have two competetive teams instead of just one (torro rosso and caterham wont bring you glory of BEST engine on grid or constant points, maybe podiums etc.). Ofcourse i am wrong my reputation telling you that. Bye!

muhammadtalha-13
muhammadtalha-13
-2
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

Neno wrote:
muhammadtalha-13 wrote:Is there a chance of Lotus switching to Merc' Engines?
1. Renault engine is quite expensive as compared to Merc'.
2. Lotus is not very strong financially like RedBull to happily buy Renault Engines.
3. Merc' requested (i don't know if it was a request or whatever) FIA to allow the manufacturers to sell their engines to at least four teams. Now they have got three. who the 4th one might be?

Renault have shown their intentions to reduce their engine supply to three teams. Toro Rosso and Red bull deals are done. Now it's either Caterham or Lotus. Marussia are likely to go for a Ferrari Engine if they decide to stay in F1.
first if marussia have money for engines then lotus have also. second we dont know real prices of engines for 2014, everything is just speculation. Also every team who is not constructor will pay for their engines (this includes lotus), so why lotus would change engine manufacturer if they are happy with current product. Also renault should be also happy to have two competetive teams instead of just one (torro rosso and caterham wont bring you glory of BEST engine on grid or constant points, maybe podiums etc.). Ofcourse i am wrong my reputation telling you that. Bye!
First, i am not saying you are wrong. Second, Marussia don't need a lot of resources because they are not gonna fight for championship but Caterhams only and resources of both these teams are almost same. Now, Lotus need every available penny to develop their car because now they have moved toward the top and will surely want to fight for the championship. And i have read somewhere that difference between prices Of Merc' and Renault is going to be about 4-5 mil Merc' being cheaper. Merc' 16-18 mil per year and Renault 20-22. So there is still some chance.

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:58 pm
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

Merc customer list is full for 2014.
  • Mercedes team
  • McLaren
  • Williams
  • Force India
At least I would think that Force India is on the list.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

muhammadtalha-13
muhammadtalha-13
-2
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:Merc customer list is full for 2014.
  • Mercedes team
  • McLaren
  • Williams
  • Force India
At least I would think that Force India is on the list.
I thought about it, and Mercedes Team is NOT A CUSTOMER. They are a works team. How can they sell their engines to themselves?

Same thing i thought about Renault as Red Bulls are NOT CUSTOMERS, but Renault said they will SUPPLY three teams, Not to SELL their engines to three teams, so it includes Red Bull.

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:58 pm
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

The Merc F1 team is a customer of Mercedes High Performance power trains. It is intra corporate business, but it is still business. I bet there will be a charge.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

wuzak
wuzak
380
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

muhammadtalha-13 wrote:Is there a chance of Lotus switching to Merc' Engines?
1. Renault engine is quite expensive as compared to Merc'.
2. Lotus is not very strong financially like RedBull to happily buy Renault Engines.
3. Merc' requested (i don't know if it was a request or whatever) FIA to allow the manufacturers to sell their engines to at least four teams. Now they have got three. who the 4th one might be?

Renault have shown their intentions to reduce their engine supply to three teams. Toro Rosso and Red bull deals are done. Now it's either Caterham or Lotus. Marussia are likely to go for a Ferrari Engine if they decide to stay in F1.
OR - Could it be another team coming in next year?
Caterham have got a supply deal with Renault (the two companies are partners in a road car project) and Marussia will have a Ferrari supply.

Renault were happy to sell to as man as 5 or 6 teams. That would elave Mercedes and Ferrari with 3 each, but now Ferrari have 3 (Ferrari, Sauber, Marussia) and Mercedes 4 (Mercedes, McLaren - 2014 only, Williams and Force India) that leaves Renault with 3 (RBR, STR, Caterham) with one team undecided (Lotus).

The Ferrari engine is as cheap or cheaper than the Merc, so would also confer considerable savings.

wuzak
wuzak
380
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

dren wrote:Electronic rear brake bias will be allowed for the KERS harvesting part.

This goes to support the idea that the teams really do not recorver energy through braking but by engine overrrun now. With the fuel cap in place for next year, teams will likely actually use the braking for recovery.
Not at all.

Drivers often struggled with KERS equipped cars under braking when they were harvesting. As experience grew with KERS the teams found how to adjust the brake bias (manually) to compensate.

With only 400kJ to harvest the KERS issue was only on some braking sections not all.

But from next year the harvesting is doubling in power (60kW to 120kW) and will bring in 5 times the energy (2MJ vs 400kJ), which would make brake balance issues even harder to control manually.

User avatar
lkocev
5
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 7:34 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

wuzak wrote:
dren wrote:Electronic rear brake bias will be allowed for the KERS harvesting part.

This goes to support the idea that the teams really do not recorver energy through braking but by engine overrrun now. With the fuel cap in place for next year, teams will likely actually use the braking for recovery.
Not at all.

Drivers often struggled with KERS equipped cars under braking when they were harvesting. As experience grew with KERS the teams found how to adjust the brake bias (manually) to compensate.

With only 400kJ to harvest the KERS issue was only on some braking sections not all.

But from next year the harvesting is doubling in power (60kW to 120kW) and will bring in 5 times the energy (2MJ vs 400kJ), which would make brake balance issues even harder to control manually.
Is it not an option to charge less than the maximum 2MJ from MGU-K? I'm not sure if the electronic brake system that was mentioned earlier means that teams would completely negate a hydraulic system to control the "friction" brakes does it? There was reference to brake mappings, similar to how they have mappings for throttle, but I imagine this would be more to control the relative rate of energy being dissipated and recovered between the "friction" brakes and MGU-K respectively.

In any case, 2MJ at a rate of 120kW, equates to 16.667s of engagement does it not? I'm not sure if there are any circuits where the drivers spend that much time braking, I remember in 2009 McLaren did not run their KER system at that years British Grand Prix (I believe that years circuit configuration was before the recent upgrade) because the time spent braking on a single lap was less than the time required to charge 400kJ of energy at a rate of 60kW (6.667s). So with no limit on the amount that the MGU-H can harvest, only on the rate (please correct me if I'm wrong) I would be leaning towards relying more on MGU-H for energy recovery rather than MGU-K?

Also could it be possible to use the MGU-H (or any kind of gear linkage to the turbo for that matter) to operate the engine ancillaries like water and oil pump?

WB I think so it could be possible to use overrun under braking to charge the current KER system, where I would expect any overrun to be offsetting the rate of energy recovery by engagement of the motor generator. Yes it would be remarkably in-efficient and I also think it would be unlikely since even todays formula has some consideration of fuel conservation during races.

User avatar
techF1LES
176
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 9:02 pm
Location: Slovakia

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

According to latest paddock rumours, new powertrains are expected to produce from 800 to 900 horsepower with up to 600 N·m of maximum torque.

User avatar
gandharva
226
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 2:19 pm
Location: Munich

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

Up to 900 bhp in quali and about 800 during race. Pirelli will provide wider rear tires and go conservative with tire compounds to deal with increasing engine power and increasing torque (600 Nm).

Blanchimont
Blanchimont
214
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post

Don't believe everything journalists write, be skeptic, think and do some calculations on your own!

900 hp in total makes 740 hp = 544 kW from the combustion engine.

544 kW = effenciency * fuel flow rate * chemical energy

effeciency = 544 kW / ( 100kg/h * 41 MJ/kg ) = 544 kW / ( 0,02777 kg/s * 41 MJ/kg ) = 0,478

This efficiency just seems to good to be true, i don't believe the claim of 900 hp!
Dear FIA, if you read this, please pm me for a redesign of the Technical Regulations to avoid finger nose shapes for 2016! :-)