The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
gruntguru
gruntguru
530
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

Post

MtthsMlw wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 3:44 pm
Not from this year's engine but still a rare look on a recent piston


https://www.racinghalloffamecollection. ... tion-8.jpg
Interestingly the link from the pic above says SF71h from 2018
Great pics thanks MtthsMlw.
The witness marks on the crown suggest that the turbulent jets are only penetrating into the "Omega Bowl" in the centre of the piston and not into the squish-zone perimeter. This is probably why according to Pat Symonds the last 20% of the charge burns quite slowly.

It also suggests that the Honda breakthrough with "HCCI" occurring at the perimeter of the chamber, may be solving a problem (slow combustion after 80% MFB) experienced by all the teams prior to this.

(Cross-posted this from the Ferrari PU thread.)
je suis charlie

gruntguru
gruntguru
530
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 12:53 am
johnny comelately wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 12:04 am
... PM2.5 .. This is a major contributor to premature deaths form engine pollution.
...From memory those pollution related deaths are a greater number than the road fatalities (1,35 million people are killed each year on the roads worldwide and 50 million injured) by a huge factor.
there are no premature deaths from engine pollution as we know it
there are premature air pollution deaths of those living in straw huts having open fires but no chimneys or flues ....
where the air pollution is 10000x that in the public domain

the WHO reports don't say what the shockumentaries tell us they say
the WHO is a campaigning organisation - now the EU claims this 0.1% prematurity - other medics say this is fiction
if Joe Soap dies aged 77 how can anyone show that was 6 weeks premature because of our cars ?
most air pollution particulate or NOx is in the home
Hmm - you start your post with an absolutist statement - and then later say the claims are under debate. Skepticism is one thing - absolutism another.

Nobody can make any claims about an individual, premature death and a subtle environmental cause. OTOH these things can be demonstrated statistically (much the same as smoking, passive smoking etc).

Similarly it is a fallacy to point to a much larger cause of the same problem to conclude that the lesser cause does not exist. e.g. Just because smokers suffer much lower life expectancy than passive smokers does not mean passive smoking does not reduce life expectancy.
je suis charlie

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
573
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

Post

gruntguru wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 11:14 pm
Tommy Cookers wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 12:53 am
johnny comelately wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 12:04 am
... PM2.5 .. This is a major contributor to premature deaths form engine pollution.
...From memory those pollution related deaths are a greater number than the road fatalities (1,35 million people are killed each year on the roads worldwide and 50 million injured) by a huge factor.
there are no premature deaths from engine pollution as we know it
... there are premature air pollution deaths of those living in straw huts having open fires but no chimneys or flues ...
....the WHO reports don't say what the shockumentaries tell us they say ....
....most air pollution particulate or NOx is in the home
Hmm - you start your post with an absolutist statement - and then ...
... does not mean passive smoking does not reduce life expectancy.
to me ....
something that sounds like 'millions dying from car pollution' is absolutist .... so ....
my claim in response (being much closer to the actuality) is legitimate .... as it's fair comment

btw .... this isn't F1philosophy.net - it's F1technical.net

I have shown that the 'science' seems worse than weak (not even claiming to be within an order or magnitude)
would we rely on a tipster who tips a horse to finish either ....
1st, or 2nd, or 3rd, or 4th, or 5th, or 6th, or 7th, or 8th, or 9th, or 10th, or 11th or 12th ?

COMEAP isn't science - it's politics - (yes the fair comment defence again)
the 50%+ engine shouldn't be killed by those who want to kill it

johnny comelately
johnny comelately
38
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

Post

We have digressed so back on topic , sort of, this is showing a concept that while not applicable to racing and in partic F1, this Clausius Rankine process is an interesting take on reclaiming that major loss ICE's have, thermal inefficiency:

Last edited by johnny comelately on Fri May 13, 2022 7:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

J.A.W.
J.A.W.
109
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Tue May 10, 2022 3:07 pm
J.A.W. wrote:
Tue May 10, 2022 8:25 am
Zynerji wrote:
Tue May 10, 2022 2:46 am
https://youtu.be/FwhMz2kR4pw
Kindly label/post up front such 'click bait' type nonsense, can you ta, Zynerji?

It saves irritating time-wasting, & so won't debase your credibility here, accordingly.
41mpg from a 302ci v8 isn't in line with the current thread?

And I have no "credibility" on these forums, as I am not an engineer. I simply learns and ask questions, point out obvious fanboism, and state my opinion on the racing and cars.

I don't need credibility in this place. I have plenty in real life.
Technical credibility on a technical forum is useful for discourse, "opinions" are likewise only
worth the evidence-base that supports them, & doing a 'sneaky' youtube 'mystery' link to a
'clickbait' clip is rather 'bad form' - according to the forum guidelines - (as well as irritating, IMO).

(Do kindly note, this comment isn't intended as a 'personal attack' - Zynerji, & as criticism,
it is solely intended - to maintain standards of technical propriety in a highly technical section.)
"Well, we knocked the bastard off!"

Ed Hilary on being 1st to top Mt Everest,
(& 1st to do a surface traverse across Antarctica,
in good Kiwi style - riding a Massey Ferguson farm
tractor - with a few extemporised mod's to hack the task).

gruntguru
gruntguru
530
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: The Road to the 50% Thermally Efficient F1 Internal Combustion Engine

Post

johnny comelately wrote:
Thu May 12, 2022 10:46 pm
We have digressed so back on topic , sort of, this is showing a concept that while not applicable to racing and in partic F1, this Clausius Rankine process is an interesting take on reclaiming that major loss ICE's have, thermal inefficiency:
Very short on numbers. A system like that might be capable of converting 5 - 10% of the exhaust waste heat into work so perhaps a 2 - 4% increase in TE. e.g. a HD truck engine might improve from 42% to 45% TE.

This is not worlds-away from the far simpler "exhaust-turbine-recovery" used in F1 and other turbo-compound engines.
je suis charlie