2021 Engine thread

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
mzso
mzso
17
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

wuzak wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 7:31 am

Why LNG? Why not hydrogen, produced from electrolysis from renewable energy, of course?
Why either? They both suck for volumetric efficiency.
Plus how would you keep LNG at -160°C on a racecar?

Zynerji
Zynerji
78
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 3:44 pm
wuzak wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 7:31 am

Why LNG? Why not hydrogen, produced from electrolysis from renewable energy, of course?
Why either? They both suck for volumetric efficiency.
Plus how would you keep LNG at -160°C on a racecar?
It would be in an insulated cannister, obviously. The inevitable rise in temp would be harnessed to maintain fuel pressure.

mzso
mzso
17
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 5:41 pm
mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 3:44 pm
wuzak wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 7:31 am

Why LNG? Why not hydrogen, produced from electrolysis from renewable energy, of course?
Why either? They both suck for volumetric efficiency.
Plus how would you keep LNG at -160°C on a racecar?
It would be in an insulated cannister, obviously. The inevitable rise in temp would be harnessed to maintain fuel pressure.
I don't think that's realistic for a tightly packed race car which produces 500 kW of heat. And what if the vacuum insulation (nothing else is really realistic) is damaged? Steam explosion?

Zynerji
Zynerji
78
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:28 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 5:41 pm
mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 3:44 pm


Why either? They both suck for volumetric efficiency.
Plus how would you keep LNG at -160°C on a racecar?
It would be in an insulated cannister, obviously. The inevitable rise in temp would be harnessed to maintain fuel pressure.
I don't think that's realistic for a tightly packed race car which produces 500 kW of heat. And what if the vacuum insulation (nothing else is really realistic) is damaged? Steam explosion?
What happens if the 258bar air tank explodes now? A controlled relief valve?

I honestly think that LNG pods wouldn't be terribly hard to engineer, would allow refueling in under 3 seconds, and would remove all of the weight of the fuel pumps and other anticillaries. I expect the pods would be a multi-layer, but thin walled construction of aluminum, Kevlar fabric(similar to current fuel tanks), and an aerogel insulator in between. If it's designed with a built in motor to allow a twist-to-lock motion when it's seated into the chassis, this would be ideal.

Any method to allow safe refuelling, cheaply, should be encouraged. If the equivalent LNG/Gasoline ratio allows reasonable sized canisters (3 sets per race, one on each side of the car, so 6 total), then the drivers no longer need to manage tyres, and can do qualifying laps, start to finish, in every GP.

That's my take, but I'm sure some don't agree, and that's OK with me!

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
535
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:28 pm
.... I don't think that's realistic for a tightly packed race car which produces 500 kW of heat. ...
LNG would allow running at 4 or 5 lambda
the engine wouldn't be dumping 500 kW of waste heat (that's the point of running so lean)
eg maybe it wouldn't need radiators

it would need a 2 stage compressor etc but all that's bolt-on
it would tend to become a compounded ICE not a weakly compounded ICE
BTE maybe 60%

mzso
mzso
17
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:47 am
mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:28 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 5:41 pm


It would be in an insulated cannister, obviously. The inevitable rise in temp would be harnessed to maintain fuel pressure.
I don't think that's realistic for a tightly packed race car which produces 500 kW of heat. And what if the vacuum insulation (nothing else is really realistic) is damaged? Steam explosion?
What happens if the 258bar air tank explodes now? A controlled relief valve?

I honestly think that LNG pods wouldn't be terribly hard to engineer, would allow refueling in under 3 seconds, and would remove all of the weight of the fuel pumps and other anticillaries. I expect the pods would be a multi-layer, but thin walled construction of aluminum, Kevlar fabric(similar to current fuel tanks), and an aerogel insulator in between. If it's designed with a built in motor to allow a twist-to-lock motion when it's seated into the chassis, this would be ideal.

Any method to allow safe refuelling, cheaply, should be encouraged. If the equivalent LNG/Gasoline ratio allows reasonable sized canisters (3 sets per race, one on each side of the car, so 6 total), then the drivers no longer need to manage tyres, and can do qualifying laps, start to finish, in every GP.

That's my take, but I'm sure some don't agree, and that's OK with me!
  • Where do the cars have 86 kg and 185l worth of liquid oxygen on board.
  • A relief valve only helps with over-temperature, it won't help with keeping the LNG at the temperature required.
  • 3 seconds for 133% as much (185 liters in total) of cryo-cooled LNG? How on earth?
    Even with three stops that's thrice 61 liters and thirty kilos + the significant weight of the cannister ( with the overhead required by the swappability it would seriously increase the weight of the cars as well.)
    If you propose something at least look up some facts.
  • Swapping canisters would be much slower. They need to open up the cover of the car, detach the nozzle, dismount the cannister. Two people need to remove the bulky canister, then put in the much heavier replacement. Secure it, attach the nozzle. Replace the cover.
  • Tire management is more easily solved by more durable tires. Plus what multiple pit-stops accomplish is plummetting on-track overtakes. (And there's no such thing a qualifying laps from start to finish, there never was. Tire management is always a factor.)

mzso
mzso
17
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:32 am
mzso wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:28 pm
.... I don't think that's realistic for a tightly packed race car which produces 500 kW of heat. ...
LNG would allow running at 4 or 5 lambda
the engine wouldn't be dumping 500 kW of waste heat (that's the point of running so lean)
eg maybe it wouldn't need radiators

it would need a 2 stage compressor etc but all that's bolt-on
it would tend to become a compounded ICE not a weakly compounded ICE
BTE maybe 60%
How so? The current PUs are already at 50% efficiency going to 60% doesn't change much.

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
535
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

running prechambers on LNG (or hydrogen) would allow higher lambda (and power) using gasoline-fuelled main chambers

NL_Fer
NL_Fer
68
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

100kg/hr @10500rpm -> 110kg/hr @15000rpm
Mgu-K 120kw -> 200kw
Manual K deployment
Single mapping

NL_Fer
NL_Fer
68
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

Damn, with 16 months till 2020 end off season test, do we even enough time to develop an new PU? An increase of fuel would require a redesign of ICE TC MGU-H, new injectors, new pistons, valvetrain.

I doubt we will see more than just another K with manual deployment paddle.

AJI
AJI
38
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:08 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

NL_Fer wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:23 pm
Damn, with 16 months till 2020 end off season test, do we even enough time to develop an new PU? An increase of fuel would require a redesign of ICE TC MGU-H, new injectors, new pistons, valvetrain.

I doubt we will see more than just another K with manual deployment paddle.
I doubt we'll even see that...

Increase SoC to 6MJ and the re-introduction of refueling are probably the only options left if the decision is made this October..?

carisi2k
carisi2k
33
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:26 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

Keep the same technology but reduce the engine size to 1 litre and allow 4 to 8 cylinders.

PABLOEING
PABLOEING
16
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 9:39 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

¿more engines in 2021......i read 8 per year.....?¿more power......more fuel pero hour?

NL_Fer
NL_Fer
68
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

PABLOEING wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:05 pm
¿more engines in 2021......i read 8 per year.....?¿more power......more fuel pero hour?
Nothing. Bigger ES and manual K deployment.

ENGINE TUNER
ENGINE TUNER
19
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2021 Engine thread

Post

carisi2k wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:34 am
Keep the same technology but reduce the engine size to 1 litre and allow 4 to 8 cylinders.
If they allowed 4 to 8 cylinders everyone would run 4 cylinders, especially if dispacement was cut to 1L.