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.
restless
15
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by restless » Mon May 20, 2019 10:47 am

Something similar to
"It is useless to argue with someone who knows everything"
and
"Never argue with an idiot...."

I'm not quite sure its ok to post insults using non-english language as admin-deflector

dren
274
User avatar
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by dren » Mon May 20, 2019 2:50 pm

gruntguru wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 6:18 am
henry wrote:
Sat May 18, 2019 1:13 pm
Another implication is that it might be useful to arrange the power curve so that the output is the same before and after gearchanges.
Definitely useful:
1. Equal power before and after the gearchange means equal torque/tractive effort at the tyre - clearly easer for the driver to manage.
These ICE should have a fairly flat power band in the upper rev range when accelerating. The MGUK could be used to make things equal.
Honda!

digitalrurouni
20
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:50 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by digitalrurouni » Tue May 21, 2019 2:06 pm

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hond ... y/4392892/

I mean Honda has been massively improved this year. I somehow believe Gasly. However despite the straight line speed Ferrari is demonstrating I think yes their PU is a bit far ahead but it's their aero that's affecting the top speed more than just straight line grunt and deployment IMHO.

j.yank
40
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:45 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by j.yank » Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm

etusch wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 9:25 pm

Before mgu-k they couldn't use full engine power with nas engines until 140 km/h. Now there is more power at lower rpm with higher torq. According to what I read about Honda Engine they are using mgu-k to generation at least until that speed. It is some kind of TC contrl Engine power and store some of unneeded engine power to use later.
You mean to use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?

Tommy Cookers
509
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by Tommy Cookers » Tue May 21, 2019 3:38 pm

j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm
.... use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?
action of ICE and MGU-K combined should be mapped to comply with the accelerator pedal-to-PU torque map rules
ie the PU torque for a given accelerator position can't fall quicker than rpm rises - a constant power map as allowed in NA F1
(presumably constant though no-one here seems to have checked this exactly from the slope limit given in the rules)

the K's dynamic behaviour might collapse (and recover) its torque (driving or generating) if triggering factors were encountered
eg if there was a sudden change in eg wheel grip (driving or braking)
accelerating whilst K-driving would give a weak TC-like effect but accelerating while K-generating would give anti-TC
and braking while K-generating would give a weak ABS-like effect
I think
these dynamic response effects might not be seen as breaking the rules on mapping
Last edited by Tommy Cookers on Tue May 21, 2019 4:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Zynerji
60
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by Zynerji » Tue May 21, 2019 3:51 pm

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 3:38 pm
j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm
.... use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?
the action of the ICE and the MGU-K combined should always comply with the accelerator pedal-to-PU torque map rules
ie the PU torque for a given accelerator position can't fall quicker than rpm rises - a constant power map as allowed in NA F1
(presumably constant though no-one here seems to have checked this exactly from the slope limit given in the rules)

the K's dynamic behaviour might collapse (and recover) its torque (driving or generating) if triggering factors were encountered
eg if there was a sudden change in eg wheel grip (driving or braking)
these dynamic response effects (somewhat like TC and even ABS) might not be seen as breaking the rules on mapping
and anyway they would be limited due to the limited size of the K
I think with the PU control maps, and "Diff magic" that the 2019 cars are probably light years ahead in "driver assistance" than the 2007 cars...

Sadly, this is probably the most "road relevant" tech in Formula 1.

Nonserviam85
10
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 10:21 am

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by Nonserviam85 » Tue May 21, 2019 4:16 pm

restless wrote:
Mon May 20, 2019 10:47 am
Something similar to
"It is useless to argue with someone who knows everything"
and
"Never argue with an idiot...."

I'm not quite sure its ok to post insults using non-english language as admin-deflector
Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you to their level and beat you due to their experience...

j.yank
40
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:45 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by j.yank » Tue May 21, 2019 4:51 pm

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 3:38 pm

accelerating whilst K-driving would give a weak TC-like effect but accelerating while K-generating would give anti-TC
and braking while K-generating would give a weak ABS-like effect
Can you elaborate more on why there would be anti-TC while K-generating? If the pedal is fully pressed out of the corner K-generating will act as a contra-torque supposedly preventing overspinning. Or maybe I have overlooked the thechnical regulations where this is not allowed?

etusch
80
User avatar
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:09 pm
Location: Turkey

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by etusch » Tue May 21, 2019 4:56 pm

j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm
etusch wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 9:25 pm

Before mgu-k they couldn't use full engine power with nas engines until 140 km/h. Now there is more power at lower rpm with higher torq. According to what I read about Honda Engine they are using mgu-k to generation at least until that speed. It is some kind of TC contrl Engine power and store some of unneeded engine power to use later.
You mean to use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?
TC cuts engine power right?
Mgu-k generates electric during accelerating and it absorbs some of engine power which will cause wheelspin until aerodinamics structure of car takes affect on the car. I think main function of this for more e-power but in the same time some kind of TC. It is something like you can send 4mj to battery directly from mgu-k but unlimited through mgu-h. So the rule do not interested mgu-k production but how much sent directly to storage. Rule bans TC but not bans (I think so) mgu-k usage during acceleration.

These are what I derive from what I read. So any correction is welcome where I am wrong.

subcritical71
68
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Virginia

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by subcritical71 » Tue May 21, 2019 6:11 pm

etusch wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 4:56 pm
j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm
etusch wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 9:25 pm

Before mgu-k they couldn't use full engine power with nas engines until 140 km/h. Now there is more power at lower rpm with higher torq. According to what I read about Honda Engine they are using mgu-k to generation at least until that speed. It is some kind of TC contrl Engine power and store some of unneeded engine power to use later.
You mean to use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?
TC cuts engine power right?
Mgu-k generates electric during accelerating and it absorbs some of engine power which will cause wheelspin until aerodinamics structure of car takes affect on the car. I think main function of this for more e-power but in the same time some kind of TC. It is something like you can send 4mj to battery directly from mgu-k but unlimited through mgu-h. So the rule do not interested mgu-k production but how much sent directly to storage. Rule bans TC but not bans (I think so) mgu-k usage during acceleration.

These are what I derive from what I read. So any correction is welcome where I am wrong.
The key here, and it is what prevents TC, is that the pedal is mapped to torque output. The minimum slope is defined in the rules and is always positive. The ICE and K power outputs must equal pedal position map within 50ms. If the driver pressed the accelerator to 100% at say 50km/h the tires would loose traction.
This all changes once the pedal is at 100%. The torque controller can then do what it wants to manage the energy situation. I could see a brief time period where the driver is still traction limited and by going to 100% the torque controller can effectively implement TC. This is just a theory of mine, but it seems well within the rules.

Tommy Cookers
509
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by Tommy Cookers » Tue May 21, 2019 8:24 pm

j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 4:51 pm
Tommy Cookers wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 3:38 pm
accelerating whilst K-driving would give a weak TC-like effect but accelerating while K-generating would give anti-TC
and braking while K-generating would give a weak ABS-like effect
Can you elaborate more on why there would be anti-TC while K-generating? If the pedal is fully pressed out of the corner K-generating will act as a contra-torque supposedly preventing overspinning. Or maybe I have overlooked the thechnical regulations where this is not allowed?
maybe I was wrong
imo
there will be inner control (feedback) loops between the K and its controller
this must include what's effectively rpm feedback - ie the K is primarily velocity-controlled
an excessive rate of change of rpm ('slew limit') will cause the K to go from full + torque to full - torque (or vice-versa)
in a few millisec
eg wheelspin is one possible cause of this triggering of limit slew rate
accelerating with K assisting ICE - on wheelspin the K would go from +120 kW to -120 kW in in a few millisec (TC emulation)
accelerating with ICE driving K generation - on wheelspin the K would remain at -120 kW (no TC effect)

these are what could be regarded as control-implemented torque 'collapses'
there can in the absence of such control be other torque collapses related to MG design factors

j.yank
40
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:45 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by j.yank » Tue May 21, 2019 10:23 pm

subcritical71 wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 6:11 pm
etusch wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 4:56 pm
j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm


You mean to use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?
TC cuts engine power right?
Mgu-k generates electric during accelerating and it absorbs some of engine power which will cause wheelspin until aerodinamics structure of car takes affect on the car. I think main function of this for more e-power but in the same time some kind of TC. It is something like you can send 4mj to battery directly from mgu-k but unlimited through mgu-h. So the rule do not interested mgu-k production but how much sent directly to storage. Rule bans TC but not bans (I think so) mgu-k usage during acceleration.

These are what I derive from what I read. So any correction is welcome where I am wrong.
The key here, and it is what prevents TC, is that the pedal is mapped to torque output. The minimum slope is defined in the rules and is always positive. The ICE and K power outputs must equal pedal position map within 50ms. If the driver pressed the accelerator to 100% at say 50km/h the tires would loose traction.
This all changes once the pedal is at 100%. The torque controller can then do what it wants to manage the energy situation. I could see a brief time period where the driver is still traction limited and by going to 100% the torque controller can effectively implement TC. This is just a theory of mine, but it seems well within the rules.
Well, I will greatly appreciate if you point the rules where this is defined - I really want to sort out this for myself but cannot spent much time for investigation of regulations. Saying this, may I speculate that ICE+K output could be always positive but actually the K output is slightly negative, and in this way suppressing the ICE excessive positive (in correlation to pedal) output? Maybe I don't know the rules but it seems to me that this is an option that seems contra intuitive (to use K as stop when the car needs full throttle), and in the same time maybe useful. Maybe the contra loads from ICE and K could explain the Red Bul troubles with the driveshaft?

henry
209
User avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by henry » Tue May 21, 2019 10:45 pm

subcritical71 wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 6:11 pm
etusch wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 4:56 pm
j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:33 pm


You mean to use MGU-K in generation mode during accelartion in order to simulate something like pasive traction control?
TC cuts engine power right?
Mgu-k generates electric during accelerating and it absorbs some of engine power which will cause wheelspin until aerodinamics structure of car takes affect on the car. I think main function of this for more e-power but in the same time some kind of TC. It is something like you can send 4mj to battery directly from mgu-k but unlimited through mgu-h. So the rule do not interested mgu-k production but how much sent directly to storage. Rule bans TC but not bans (I think so) mgu-k usage during acceleration.

These are what I derive from what I read. So any correction is welcome where I am wrong.
The key here, and it is what prevents TC, is that the pedal is mapped to torque output. The minimum slope is defined in the rules and is always positive. The ICE and K power outputs must equal pedal position map within 50ms. If the driver pressed the accelerator to 100% at say 50km/h the tires would loose traction.
This all changes once the pedal is at 100%. The torque controller can then do what it wants to manage the energy situation. I could see a brief time period where the driver is still traction limited and by going to 100% the torque controller can effectively implement TC. This is just a theory of mine, but it seems well within the rules.
That’s an interesting theory. At 100% demand the power output can vary by 120kW either way. So if the driver demands 100% too early then as you say it is possible the ECU could vary power to implement TC. However to get there the driver needs to go through lower demands where this assistance potentially comes into play.

The 50ms requirement represents about 2 metres at the traction limit speed in a straight line. So potentially if two cars are implemented with differing delays the car with the longer delay could get onto the throttle a metre or two earlier. At this point they are accelerating at around 2G so a metre earlier might be worthwhile.

Another unknown in this is the torque measurement. I assume it is a noisy signal which needs to be filtered. I would expect the filtering to add a delay which would eat into the 50ms. But it might also disguise the torque fluctuations that @Tommy Cookers discusses in his post.
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

subcritical71
68
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Virginia

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by subcritical71 » Tue May 21, 2019 11:33 pm

j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 10:23 pm
Well, I will greatly appreciate if you point the rules where this is defined - I really want to sort out this for myself but cannot spent much time for investigation of regulations. Saying this, may I speculate that ICE+K output could be always positive but actually the K output is slightly negative, and in this way suppressing the ICE excessive positive (in correlation to pedal) output? Maybe I don't know the rules but it seems to me that this is an option that seems contra intuitive (to use K as stop when the car needs full throttle), and in the same time maybe useful. Maybe the contra loads from ICE and K could explain the Red Bul troubles with the driveshaft?
Well, its not completely defined in the regulations. The minimum ramp rate and pedal to torque ratio is defined in the regulations. I agree with you though, as long as the torque demanded by the pedal position is achieved, its up to the strategy how much comes from ICE and/or +/- MGU-K.
5.5 Power unit torque demand :
5.5.1 The only means by which the driver may control acceleration torque to the driven wheels is via
a single foot (accelerator) pedal mounted inside the survival cell.
5.5.2 Designs which allow specific points along the accelerator pedal travel range to be identified by the driver or assist him to hold a position are not permitted.
5.5.3 At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position.
5.5.4 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 4,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.045Nm/rpm.
The part about how the ICE & K total power bit is an interpretation from a research paper done at the Zurich ZTH (link: https://www.research-collection.ethz.ch ... sAllowed=y). While it is a research paper, the author acknowledges help from Ferrari and has interpretations of the rules as he knows them (again, he had help from Ferrari so I weight his interpretations on the informed side). Look up the second co-examiners name on LinkedIn and you will see something interesting (link: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlo-bussi ... bdomain=it) - somehow he is only twice removed from me :shock: .

If you don't have a lot of time, read the introduction of the research paper starting on page 1.

j.yank
40
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:45 pm

Re: Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post by j.yank » Wed May 22, 2019 7:26 am

subcritical71 wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 11:33 pm
j.yank wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 10:23 pm
Well, I will greatly appreciate if you point the rules where this is defined - I really want to sort out this for myself but cannot spent much time for investigation of regulations. Saying this, may I speculate that ICE+K output could be always positive but actually the K output is slightly negative, and in this way suppressing the ICE excessive positive (in correlation to pedal) output? Maybe I don't know the rules but it seems to me that this is an option that seems contra intuitive (to use K as stop when the car needs full throttle), and in the same time maybe useful. Maybe the contra loads from ICE and K could explain the Red Bul troubles with the driveshaft?
Well, its not completely defined in the regulations. The minimum ramp rate and pedal to torque ratio is defined in the regulations. I agree with you though, as long as the torque demanded by the pedal position is achieved, its up to the strategy how much comes from ICE and/or +/- MGU-K.
5.5 Power unit torque demand :
5.5.1 The only means by which the driver may control acceleration torque to the driven wheels is via
a single foot (accelerator) pedal mounted inside the survival cell.
5.5.2 Designs which allow specific points along the accelerator pedal travel range to be identified by the driver or assist him to hold a position are not permitted.
5.5.3 At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position.
5.5.4 At any given accelerator pedal position and above 4,000rpm, the driver torque demand map must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.045Nm/rpm.
The part about how the ICE & K total power bit is an interpretation from a research paper done at the Zurich ZTH (link: https://www.research-collection.ethz.ch ... sAllowed=y). While it is a research paper, the author acknowledges help from Ferrari and has interpretations of the rules as he knows them (again, he had help from Ferrari so I weight his interpretations on the informed side). Look up the second co-examiners name on LinkedIn and you will see something interesting (link: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlo-bussi ... bdomain=it) - somehow he is only twice removed from me :shock: .

If you don't have a lot of time, read the introduction of the research paper starting on page 1.
Thank you very much! There are two "if"s on page 2 that are relevant: "If the driver is not requesting full power, the control system must deliver the amount of power requested by the driver, and the energy management system can
only decide how to split it between the ICE and the MGU-K. Conversely, if the driver is requesting maximum power, the regulations allow the energy management system to decide the amount of propulsive power to provide and the split between the actuators."

The first case is trickier to use MGU-K as TC, but the second one is interesting. What if on exit of the corner the driver requests maximum power but the K is still in generating mode, in this way subtracting from the ICE power, and after this the driver lift off the pedal for a while but in the same time, the K goes in driving mode, in this way compensating the diminishing power from ICE? Also, when the pedal is on 100% "regulations allow the energy management system to decide the amount of propulsive power to provide" - but the same system according to the scheme, receives information from the weels, and it can decide how much of the requested full power to come from ICE and how much it to be suppressed by the K in generating mode. Maybe this is discussed in the paper but right now, I don't have time to read it to the end.