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.
roon
135
User avatar
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by roon » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:22 pm

Mudflap wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:09 pm
Nah, its more likely that they use turboencabulators
They still can't effectively prevent side fumbling, so I highly doubt they are using turboencabulators.

Re: vortex tubes, the requirement for an open port in the system to function seems antithetical to maintaining pressure in the plenums. Could the compressor compensate?

godlameroso
161
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by godlameroso » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:11 pm

hurril wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:51 pm
godlameroso wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:33 pm
According to this they can cool the intake charge below +10 degrees ambient, wonder if that's why the rules state IAT must be 10+ degrees above ambient. I wonder if they wanted a heat exchanger arms race because this is how you get one. If these intercoolers are that efficient, then they can be sized smaller and smaller in order to meet the 10+ ambient requirement. Which has obvious benefits.

They also say that using microtubes saves on cost because there's no welding, but I can't imagine these are cheap either.
How could they possibly cool to something below ambient? Is there a compressor involved?
Again you misunderstand, the regulations forbid you to cool the IAT less than 10 degrees above ambient. So if ambient is 22c IATs can't be less than 32c. These micro tube intercoolers can keep IATs from going over 6 or 7 degrees over ambient. Which means they can make them smaller and less efficient so they meet that 10+ ambient IAT rule.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

Zynerji
12
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Zynerji » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:01 pm

roon wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:22 pm
Mudflap wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:09 pm
Nah, its more likely that they use turboencabulators
They still can't effectively prevent side fumbling, so I highly doubt they are using turboencabulators.

Re: vortex tubes, the requirement for an open port in the system to function seems antithetical to maintaining pressure in the plenums. Could the compressor compensate?
I would think that running a Diesel turbo on a petrol engine should get you there...

Mudflap
47
User avatar
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by Mudflap » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:16 pm

Zynerji wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:01 pm
roon wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:22 pm
Mudflap wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:09 pm
Nah, its more likely that they use turboencabulators
They still can't effectively prevent side fumbling, so I highly doubt they are using turboencabulators.

Re: vortex tubes, the requirement for an open port in the system to function seems antithetical to maintaining pressure in the plenums. Could the compressor compensate?
I would think that running a Diesel turbo on a petrol engine should get you there...
we all know renault are using the turbo from the espace 1.6 dci
Si vis pacem volve velox

godlameroso
161
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by godlameroso » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:51 pm

One has to wonder, Renault or Honda can't possibly not know about this, ditto for all teams really. If these are so efficient then cooling shouldn't even be an issue.

Only real question is what benefit would the tube and fin have over this compact micro tube One? Why would Red Bull(not that they do not do I claim to know) run a conventional air to air?
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

MrPotatoHead
45
User avatar
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:03 pm
Location: All over.

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by MrPotatoHead » Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:42 am

godlameroso wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:51 pm
One has to wonder, Renault or Honda can't possibly not know about this, ditto for all teams really. If these are so efficient then cooling shouldn't even be an issue.

Only real question is what benefit would the tube and fin have over this compact micro tube One? Why would Red Bull(not that they do not do I claim to know) run a conventional air to air?
Because it is always a trade off going water to water. You add a lot more weight and parts to the car. Air to Air is simpler and less to go wrong.

And besides most of the teams get their radiators / Intercoolers / oil coolers from the same company. They all know of the same tech and options.

turbof1
Moderator
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:36 pm

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

Post by turbof1 » Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:12 pm

Changes topic title slightly to include timeline, as changes are planned in 2021.

PlatinumZealot
265
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:45 am

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

Post by PlatinumZealot » Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:59 am

Yup. Air to water is a luxury item. If your chassis is light enough you can take advantage of its better packaging for aero benefits. There is also additional heat capacity with water (like a bulk cooling reservoir) so temeprature variations of the intercooler are minimized and you have more consistent charge temperatures... Though it is quite marginal because the reservoir of water used is quite small anyway to keep weight down.
"Raindrops .. drop top!"

gruntguru
345
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

Post by gruntguru » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:30 am

PlatinumZealot wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:59 am
Yup. Air to water is a luxury item. If your chassis is light enough you can take advantage of its better packaging for aero benefits. There is also additional heat capacity with water (like a bulk cooling reservoir) so temeprature variations of the intercooler are minimized and you have more consistent charge temperatures... Though it is quite marginal because the reservoir of water used is quite small anyway to keep weight down.
MrPotatoHead wrote:
Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:42 am
Because it is always a trade off going water to water. You add a lot more weight and parts to the car. Air to Air is simpler and less to go wrong.

And besides most of the teams get their radiators / Intercoolers / oil coolers from the same company. They all know of the same tech and options.
MrPotatoHead wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:24 pm
This will explain a lot of it for you:
https://mezzotech.com/why-micro-tubes/
Mr PH your Mezzo link claims a weight saving over air - air.
je suis charlie

roon
135
User avatar
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

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

Post by roon » Sun Jan 14, 2018 10:25 pm

Water lines are much thinner than charge lines. Look at McLaren radiator pics. Maybe 10-15mm dia for engine coolant.

Water radiators are typically thinner than air-air radiators. Very noticable in the Renault installation. Filled with coolant, but again, thin tubes and channels minimize coolant weight.

The Mezzo unit is compact so I can see how the whole system adds up to equal/less than an air-air system.