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.
NL_Fer
63
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by NL_Fer » Sun Sep 08, 2019 7:17 am

3 MGU-K units per season is better for assembly of the PU’s. MGU-K can now be mated to the ICE in the factory.

Zynerji
58
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Zynerji » Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:43 am

This is silly until we get the actual, codified language. It should talk more about what happens if they go through there allotment early, is the 4th unit available early and under what circumstance?

The way it's worded, if it's damaged in the penultimate race, the final race must still run it. It sounds kind of stupid to be honest. Almost like Activision Blizzard is making the rules for F-1 now.

saviour stivala
-13
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by saviour stivala » Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:10 am

NL_Fer wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 7:17 am
3 MGU-K units per season is better for assembly of the PU’s. MGU-K can now be mated to the ICE in the factory.
What difference does it make replacing an MGU-K on a engine in use and bolting one on an engine being assembled at the factory, such replacements are designed with no fitting or mating needed be done.

NL_Fer
63
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by NL_Fer » Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:33 pm

saviour stivala wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:10 am
NL_Fer wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 7:17 am
3 MGU-K units per season is better for assembly of the PU’s. MGU-K can now be mated to the ICE in the factory.
What difference does it make replacing an MGU-K on a engine in use and bolting one on an engine being assembled at the factory, such replacements are designed with no fitting or mating needed be done.
Last year onsite Renault engineers had a very hard time mounting the K to the ICE. It has to be done very secure.

Jolle
158
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Jolle » Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:00 am

NL_Fer wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:33 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:10 am
NL_Fer wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 7:17 am
3 MGU-K units per season is better for assembly of the PU’s. MGU-K can now be mated to the ICE in the factory.
What difference does it make replacing an MGU-K on a engine in use and bolting one on an engine being assembled at the factory, such replacements are designed with no fitting or mating needed be done.
Last year onsite Renault engineers had a very hard time mounting the K to the ICE. It has to be done very secure.
If all goes a bit according to plan, both the Friday, race and spare units are assembled in the factory and only changed as a unit. No real need to change out K units.

Ringleheim
3
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:02 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Ringleheim » Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:57 am

Wish they'd eliminate these ridiculous engine limit rules.

The cost is in the design and development of the engine concept. Once that is done, there isn't much difference in the cost of 1, 5, or 10 units.

Can you imagine how much power they'd be making if these engines were allowed to run on the edge because they only had to last 1 race!?

And we'd also see dramatic engine blow-ups again, which would be great. Adds spice to the racing too.

djos
123
User avatar
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 5:09 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by djos » Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:14 pm

Ringleheim wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:57 am
Wish they'd eliminate these ridiculous engine limit rules.

The cost is in the design and development of the engine concept. Once that is done, there isn't much difference in the cost of 1, 5, or 10 units.

Can you imagine how much power they'd be making if these engines were allowed to run on the edge because they only had to last 1 race!?

And we'd also see dramatic engine blow-ups again, which would be great. Adds spice to the racing too.
I agree, as much as I hated it at the time, I now miss the 1 Engine & 1 gearbox per weekend rule. Let's get back to going flat-out from the start of the weekend to the end of the weekend again!
Last edited by djos on Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity which the merely improbable lacks.

NL_Fer
63
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by NL_Fer » Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:25 pm

For the customer teams is it 12M. I doubt they can built 2x22 units for that money.

But yes, burning a double amount of units on the dyno has to end next year.

Cold Fussion
136
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 3:51 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Cold Fussion » Sun Sep 29, 2019 6:27 am

Zynerji wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:43 am
The way it's worded, if it's damaged in the penultimate race, the final race must still run it. It sounds kind of stupid to be honest. Almost like Activision Blizzard is making the rules for F-1 now.
If Activision Blizzard was running F1 there would be no published rule book.

Zynerji
58
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Zynerji » Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:04 pm

Cold Fussion wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 6:27 am
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:43 am
The way it's worded, if it's damaged in the penultimate race, the final race must still run it. It sounds kind of stupid to be honest. Almost like Activision Blizzard is making the rules for F-1 now.
If Activision Blizzard was running F1 there would be no published rule book.
100%

NL_Fer
63
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by NL_Fer » Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:00 pm

The FIA imposed a limit for compression ratio of 1:18 a while back.

Can anyone confirm they are using a Miller cycle, because 1:18 is very high for an Otto cycle, even without turbo.

Miller would be a logical choice, to reduce the amount of exhaust gas, these ultra-lean burn engines produce. Sure the MGU-H can harvest it, but direct to the crank would be the best.

Tommy Cookers
516
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Tommy Cookers » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:20 am

NL_Fer wrote:
Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:00 pm
....Miller would be a logical choice, to reduce the amount of exhaust gas, these ultra-lean burn engines produce. Sure the MGU-H can harvest it, but direct to the crank would be the best.
isn't this a contradiction ?
ultra-lean by reducing the amount of air for the given fuel rate ?
and a contradiction of what you have just been posting in the Ferrari thread

EDIT
but if we think that 18:1 is possible (because ultra-lean the combustion heat is much reduced by dilution) without Miller
so the 18:1 limit is intended to deter or prevent Millerisation
Last edited by Tommy Cookers on Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

henry
242
User avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by henry » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:53 am

NL_Fer wrote:
Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:00 pm
The FIA imposed a limit for compression ratio of 1:18 a while back.

Can anyone confirm they are using a Miller cycle, because 1:18 is very high for an Otto cycle, even without turbo.

Miller would be a logical choice, to reduce the amount of exhaust gas, these ultra-lean burn engines produce. Sure the MGU-H can harvest it, but direct to the crank would be the best.
I doubt anyone outside the engine makers is likely to know. In 5 years very little has been confirmed about the actual operation of these power units.

A potential for Miller cycle would be to inject in such a way that some of the fuel/air is returned to the intake manifold where it could be mixing in preparation for the next cycle. This would help stratify the charge and emulate two injector jet combustion.
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

gruntguru
436
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by gruntguru » Tue Oct 08, 2019 1:25 am

Interesting thought on 18:1 compression - this would be difficult to achieve in a short stroke pent-roof chamber. At the very least the chamber shape would be compromised with significant valve reliefs in the piston and limitations on valve events (limited overlap).
je suis charlie

Zynerji
58
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Zynerji » Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:57 am

henry wrote:
Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:53 am
NL_Fer wrote:
Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:00 pm
The FIA imposed a limit for compression ratio of 1:18 a while back.

Can anyone confirm they are using a Miller cycle, because 1:18 is very high for an Otto cycle, even without turbo.

Miller would be a logical choice, to reduce the amount of exhaust gas, these ultra-lean burn engines produce. Sure the MGU-H can harvest it, but direct to the crank would be the best.
I doubt anyone outside the engine makers is likely to know. In 5 years very little has been confirmed about the actual operation of these power units.

A potential for Miller cycle would be to inject in such a way that some of the fuel/air is returned to the intake manifold where it could be mixing in preparation for the next cycle. This would help stratify the charge and emulate two injector jet combustion.
Honda released the info about the intake runner butterflies. I speculated at the time that they were pressurizing the intake runner during the compression stroke, or backfilling fuel into the plenum.

IIRC, lots of posters dismissed the concept out of hand. It's nice to read that it may have actually been done.