Multi-engine F1 cars

[Javert]

I am no expert in the question, but I was thinking to cores in smartphones

If you could have a choice between these two configs:

1 ICE 100 kg 100 kg/h 1 MGU-K+MGU-H 160cv per lap

or

2 ICE 50 kg 50 kg/h 2 MGU-K+MGU-H each one 80cv per lap

What would you choose?

[Joseki]

I'd keep it simple, double the parts double the troubles.

[wuzak]

Multi-cores in computer systems (and smart phones) speed things up by dividing tasks between them (multi-threading).

It wouldn't quite work like that with engines, as they would still be doing the same thing - driving the car.

If, however, you relieved one engine of generating electricity (ie take away the MGUH generating function) and then had a second motor whose sole purpose was to generate electricity for use in the main engine then I think it would give some benefit.

However, the weight of two complete, identical units will almost certainly be heavier than one single unit of the same output.

[wesley123]

The people above me gave some good arguments, but there's another one; Packaging. 2 of those will simply require a larger, and more complex packaging.

Although it has to be noted it has been done at Pikes Peak;
http://www.speedhunters.com/2014/04/twi ... ki-escudo/

[Cold Fussion]

I am no expert in the question, but I was thinking to cores in smartphones

If you could have a choice between these two configs:

1 ICE 100 kg 100 kg/h 1 MGU-K+MGU-H 160cv per lap

or

2 ICE 50 kg 50 kg/h 2 MGU-K+MGU-H each one 80cv per lap

What would you choose?

If the volume requirements were the same then a case could be make for having 2 of the small unit could provide some advantage (you could have an extremely powerful differential for example). However even having the same volume requirement, packaging 2 vs 1 would probably still be very challenging.

[wuzak]

The people above me gave some good arguments, but there's another one; Packaging. 2 of those will simply require a larger, and more complex packaging.

Although it has to be noted it has been done at Pikes Peak;
http://www.speedhunters.com/2014/04/twi ... ki-escudo/

Ferrari did it before, with Alfa Romeo:

http://www.favcars.com/alfa-romeo-16c-b ... 142215.htm
http://s775.photobucket.com/user/Montie ... e.jpg.html

[Javert]

And what about big.LITTLE configurations?

I.e. current engines can obviously use qualifying maps (that uses more fuel) and race maps (that uses less fuel)

But (not considering the packaging) what about a bigger engine (that is adapt to use the full current qualifying fuel map and extracts MORE power from it than the current engines) and a little engine (that uses the fuel of current race map but extracts MORE power than the current engines)?

It is possible? I have no idea of the variables in the current engines

[Jolle]

Maybe hou could draw a comparison between battery life -amount of cores with smartphones to the old style F1 when engine configuration was a bit less limited (the difference between a v8 and a v12, more cylinders, higher engine speed, more power, less torque and fuel economy)

Etc