Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
bigblue
20
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2014 11:18 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by bigblue » Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:39 pm

Kinda interesting, but think this kind of conversation could carry on in the General F1 Honda Topic ?

Zynerji
42
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by Zynerji » Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:20 am

Big Tea wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 6:09 pm
Would Aston martin be impressed with the Honda tie up and would Honda be keen on the AM name on the teams cars?

I can see Horner/ Marco going to F1 about this and saying its impossible give us a merc or Ferrari engine for the boss team RBR depends on AM sponsorship and if Honda dont like it either, think they may get it considered?
Not if the engines in the RBR continue to be "TAG Heuer".

blueytoo
2
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:37 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by blueytoo » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:16 am

Christian Horner said the Mercedes and Ferrari consume 500mL oil more than Renault/Tag Heuer per 100L fuel. Wondering if the new Honda PU has managed to maximise oil consumption and how much is there to be gained and how??

Extra low tension rings; compression-activated sealing?
Stabilised combustion with extra high compression ratio?
2 stroke engine cycle?

3jawchuck
31
User avatar
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 7:57 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by 3jawchuck » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:18 am

blueytoo wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:16 am
Christian Horner said the Mercedes and Ferrari consume 500mL oil more than Renault/Tag Heuer per 100L fuel. Wondering if the new Honda PU has managed to maximise oil consumption and how much is there to be gained and how??

Extra low tension rings; compression-activated sealing?
Stabilised combustion with extra high compression ratio?
2 stroke engine cycle?
2-stroke would be illegal for a start.
5.1.1 Only 4-stroke engines with reciprocating pistons are permitted.

blueytoo
2
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:37 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by blueytoo » Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:34 pm

3jawchuck wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:18 am
2-stroke would be illegal for a start.
5.1.1 Only 4-stroke engines with reciprocating pistons are permitted.
Ok. But this is F1. What about a creative 4 stroke that got a small charge into part of the intake stroke????

camflange
0
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2018 12:18 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by camflange » Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:46 pm

Honda used two engines on week 1 one on Monday and Wednesday and the second one Tuesday and Thursday . The third engine ran all of the second week with a slight anomaly with about 2 hours to go and they decided not to run ,so very promising from Honda.

HPD
204
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 3:06 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by HPD » Fri Mar 16, 2018 12:40 pm

How big was the advantage of being used to late engine changes in the past?
James Key: The advantage was big [laughs]. It was not easy even at V8 times. But with these power units, it's incredibly complicated. There is an awful lot to consider. The physical design of being able to put everything in the right place plays an important role. But there are many other structural elements, such as the entire control units and cooling circuits, of which there are quite a few in these hybrid engines. Technically, this makes it very complicated. We had worse than a decision in September. Since we had experience as a team here, we were able to handle it efficiently. It was not a big problem for us.

The biggest difference between Renault and Honda in architecture is certainly the turbo concept. At Honda sits the compressor - as with Mercedes - at the front of the engine and the turbocharger behind it, at Renault turbo and supercharger are one unit. McLaren's chief technology officer Tim Goss says he prefers Renault packaging. You probably think differently now ...
James Key: That's very diplomatic of him [laughs]. What else should one say? We have also experienced both variants. There are both advantages and disadvantages. The supercharged packaging in front of the engine is a bit simpler than with both parts in the back. With more space in front, it is easier to find gas volumes and to lay certain lines. The oil tank is also less restricted. At the rear, it is more difficult, because there jams all the heat. You also have to keep in mind that the turbo is closer to the gearbox. The exhaust is further back, which additionally increases the temperature at the transmission. On the chassis side, there is pros and cons, but our backside is much cleaner now.

We now have more space and freedom behind the engine for suspension parts and so on. It's a bit narrower at the front, but Honda has found a fantastic arrangement where the parts are housed very well in the little space they have. It was not the compromise we feared. The downside we had was that we could not do that from the outset for 2018 with Honda. But we can do that for 2019 and we are looking for ways to further optimize it. I prefer the Honda approach. Not only because we have Honda now, but because they have some great features around this engine philosophy. It is a tidy approach.

You mentioned that the collaboration came too late to be able to bear fruitful factory team results. But are there any details on the engine that they could influence?
James Key: There are a few small things that Honda has been able to change for us, but also some things we've changed for them. We have already talked about developmental steps that work for both sides. They have already been able to do some work and more over the course of the season. Our approach with them is to give them the flexibility they need to focus on engine development. We do not want to give them too many restrictions through the chassis. As a result, there were no late changes for her, which was very important. We'd better make some compromises, but then benefit from a better engine. That's an important balance to find.

They have already mentioned the transmission. The transmission is not only gearbox, but also houses suspension components of the rear axle and the articulation points of control arms and pull lever. Toro Rosso builds the gearbox itself and uses the innards of Red Bull. How big is the advantage of being able to design the rear axle yourself?
James Key: In any case, it's an advantage. The entire transmission has been redesigned for the Honda Split Turbo installation and other things. It allowed us to revise the entire architecture at the rear, which was not bad. The rear suspension was a new development anyway. The result is a completely new gearbox. It may have been even more critical from a time ago than the chassis, but the guys did a great job getting it together so quickly. This helps if you are suddenly in such a situation because you have a late engine decision. Then you have to be in control of these things around it. This control we have with the gearbox now. That's why we were able to adjust that so quickly. The gearbox we had was quite flexible, so it was not a fundamental redesign. We could adapt it to the principles we already had.

The side boxes look very similar to last year, the airbox has become much larger. Does that mean the Honda engine needs more cooling than the Renault?
James Key: No, I would rather say that the cooling requirements are different because there are different ways of cooling certain circuits in the engine. The side boxes have even become a bit smaller, but they have kept their shape. We wanted to see how the air flow changes as we cool more about the airbox and less about the side boxes. But here, too, we are following a trend of the past years. The 2015 coolers (with Ferrari engine) were quite large, but it also depends a lot on how the engine looks like, whether the space above the engine is a good place to arrange cooling systems. We have managed to stay as much as possible with the shape of the Honda engine. The layout is not dissimilar to the solution we had planned for the Renault engine.

https://www.motorsport-magazin.com/form ... interview/

maguetox
8
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 1:46 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by maguetox » Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:05 pm

HPD wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 12:40 pm
How big was the advantage of being used to late engine changes in the past?
James Key: The advantage was big [laughs]. It was not easy even at V8 times. But with these power units, it's incredibly complicated. There is an awful lot to consider. The physical design of being able to put everything in the right place plays an important role. But there are many other structural elements, such as the entire control units and cooling circuits, of which there are quite a few in these hybrid engines. Technically, this makes it very complicated. We had worse than a decision in September. Since we had experience as a team here, we were able to handle it efficiently. It was not a big problem for us.

The biggest difference between Renault and Honda in architecture is certainly the turbo concept. At Honda sits the compressor - as with Mercedes - at the front of the engine and the turbocharger behind it, at Renault turbo and supercharger are one unit. McLaren's chief technology officer Tim Goss says he prefers Renault packaging. You probably think differently now ...
James Key: That's very diplomatic of him [laughs]. What else should one say? We have also experienced both variants. There are both advantages and disadvantages. The supercharged packaging in front of the engine is a bit simpler than with both parts in the back. With more space in front, it is easier to find gas volumes and to lay certain lines. The oil tank is also less restricted. At the rear, it is more difficult, because there jams all the heat. You also have to keep in mind that the turbo is closer to the gearbox. The exhaust is further back, which additionally increases the temperature at the transmission. On the chassis side, there is pros and cons, but our backside is much cleaner now.

We now have more space and freedom behind the engine for suspension parts and so on. It's a bit narrower at the front, but Honda has found a fantastic arrangement where the parts are housed very well in the little space they have. It was not the compromise we feared. The downside we had was that we could not do that from the outset for 2018 with Honda. But we can do that for 2019 and we are looking for ways to further optimize it. I prefer the Honda approach. Not only because we have Honda now, but because they have some great features around this engine philosophy. It is a tidy approach.

You mentioned that the collaboration came too late to be able to bear fruitful factory team results. But are there any details on the engine that they could influence?
James Key: There are a few small things that Honda has been able to change for us, but also some things we've changed for them. We have already talked about developmental steps that work for both sides. They have already been able to do some work and more over the course of the season. Our approach with them is to give them the flexibility they need to focus on engine development. We do not want to give them too many restrictions through the chassis. As a result, there were no late changes for her, which was very important. We'd better make some compromises, but then benefit from a better engine. That's an important balance to find.

They have already mentioned the transmission. The transmission is not only gearbox, but also houses suspension components of the rear axle and the articulation points of control arms and pull lever. Toro Rosso builds the gearbox itself and uses the innards of Red Bull. How big is the advantage of being able to design the rear axle yourself?
James Key: In any case, it's an advantage. The entire transmission has been redesigned for the Honda Split Turbo installation and other things. It allowed us to revise the entire architecture at the rear, which was not bad. The rear suspension was a new development anyway. The result is a completely new gearbox. It may have been even more critical from a time ago than the chassis, but the guys did a great job getting it together so quickly. This helps if you are suddenly in such a situation because you have a late engine decision. Then you have to be in control of these things around it. This control we have with the gearbox now. That's why we were able to adjust that so quickly. The gearbox we had was quite flexible, so it was not a fundamental redesign. We could adapt it to the principles we already had.

The side boxes look very similar to last year, the airbox has become much larger. Does that mean the Honda engine needs more cooling than the Renault?
James Key: No, I would rather say that the cooling requirements are different because there are different ways of cooling certain circuits in the engine. The side boxes have even become a bit smaller, but they have kept their shape. We wanted to see how the air flow changes as we cool more about the airbox and less about the side boxes. But here, too, we are following a trend of the past years. The 2015 coolers (with Ferrari engine) were quite large, but it also depends a lot on how the engine looks like, whether the space above the engine is a good place to arrange cooling systems. We have managed to stay as much as possible with the shape of the Honda engine. The layout is not dissimilar to the solution we had planned for the Renault engine.

https://www.motorsport-magazin.com/form ... interview/
More and more I like these guys of TR. They look very honest with their answers.

Snorked
30
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by Snorked » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:48 pm

Honda received an unexpected power boost: http://members.f1-life.net/report/64994/

Was this known prior to testing or was this boost noticed after anaylasing the testing data?

McMika98
2
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:40 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by McMika98 » Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:11 pm

Snorked wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:48 pm
Honda received an unexpected power boost: http://members.f1-life.net/report/64994/

Was this known prior to testing or was this boost noticed after analysing the testing data?
It would be marginal. Cant believe they are using the same engine as last year. That Ted guy is looking very smart now. He did say this in his rambles when every report was saying its got new innovations.
Anothe
Once again the preseason speculation and dreams were enthralling. With reality kicking in next week, eagerly waiting for 2019 speculation to begin.

PlatinumZealot
322
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:45 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by PlatinumZealot » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:52 am

Just another F1 Journalist throwing it and hoping it sticks. Doesn't matter if he's Japanese. Until I hear it from a Honda engineer's mouth, whatever is reported means nothing to me.

Roostfactor
5
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:50 am
Location: Texas

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by Roostfactor » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:48 am

Looking at last year turbo inlet it appears restricted. Possibly Toro Rosso engineers allotted a little more room there providing more power without any engine modifications?
Speculation of course but amazing gains can happen when teams actually work together towards a common goal.

Wazari
627
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:49 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by Wazari » Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:05 am

I think the above mentioned article is poorly written and open for confusion. The 618 is not a variation of the 617. The block is the same as some internal components and the turbine housing is similar but that's about it. People that are saying that TR is using last year's PU are mistaken. Also the current 618 is not Spec 4.0 but really 4.1 or 4.2 that will open the season. I am going to call the next upgrade 4.5 as the ICE will receive major changes on the top end.

Also the current "packaging" is something that TR could not take full advantage of as the chassis for this year was designed with the Renault PU in mind. The integration comes with compromises on both sides but mainly on TR's side.
If you can make the opposition flinch, you have already won.

ivanlesk
11
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:09 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by ivanlesk » Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:25 am

Wazari wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:05 am
I think the above mentioned article is poorly written and open for confusion. The 618 is not a variation of the 617. The block is the same as some internal components and the turbine housing is similar but that's about it. People that are saying that TR is using last year's PU are mistaken. Also the current 618 is not Spec 4.0 but really 4.1 or 4.2 that will open the season. I am going to call the next upgrade 4.5 as the ICE will receive major changes on the top end.

Also the current "packaging" is something that TR could not take full advantage of as the chassis for this year was designed with the Renault PU in mind. The integration comes with compromises on both sides but mainly on TR's side.
Wow, and when i said this at beginning of testing, that most of compromises was on on TR side and that TR chasis was not build around Honda engine, i was mocked by Honda "experts".

Well done techman and etusch, well done.
.

techman
-15
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 9:25 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post by techman » Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:38 am

Wow, and when i said this at beginning of testing, that most of compromises was on on TR side and that TR chasis was not build around Honda engine, i was mocked by Honda "experts".

Well done techman and etusch, well done.
i think you misunderstood. honda did not have to fit their engine into a restricted size zero concept like they did with mclaren. that was what i am trying to say. honda engine was compromised by mclaren size zero concept just like what happening with mclaren with their renault engine and having overheating issues. and TR had to listen to honda advice and work their chassis aroung the honda engine so the they can integrated the honda engine in a short time. and not the opposite. its pretty evident with all the struggles mclaren are going with the renault engine in testing. and do u think it will end in testing? no i think some of their issues might come up in race because they did not consider enough cooling for the renault and other parts when they did the designing.

here is a james key quote.
You mentioned that the collaboration came too late to be able to bear fruitful factory team results. But are there any details on the engine that they could influence?

James Key: There are a few small things that Honda has been able to change for us, but also some things we've changed for them. We have already talked about developmental steps that work for both sides. They have already been able to do some work and more over the course of the season. Our approach with them is to give them the flexibility they need to focus on engine development. We do not want to give them too many restrictions through the chassis. As a result, there were no late changes for her, which was very important. We'd better make some compromises, but then benefit from a better engine. That's an important balance to find.