F1technical.net

Lauda is the least reliable person in the paddock imho

When comparing old and new power levels, you also have to take into account that the V10 and V8 engines were peaky in power while the current V6s give a very flat powerband.
One could say that the V8 had more power than the V6 (peak power at max RPM) and at the same time say it had less power (less average power over the used RPM range) and be correct on both accounts, even if looking just at the ICE. The power produced by the V6 can also probably be manipulated (via wording) over a 200HP window depending of which interests are to be served.

Do you see this coming...? Bye to "size cero"?


imagen jpg

namao wrote:Do you see this coming...? Bye to "size cero"?

http://postimage.org/
imagen jpg

On the right pic is 29 whit 30's livery.

Facts Only wrote:Its easy to say something is obvious, especially when you have 2 years of knowledge on what was the best solution.

"MGUH -> MGUK -> Wheels" was obvious to me the day the new formula was rumoured. If it was obvious to me, it would have been obvious to at least some of the engineers in a multi-million dollar design team.

PlatinumZealot wrote:OK. This is called compressor surge. Stall is the opposite. Surge is when the compressor hit its peak mass flow and it cannot push out any more flow. This is at the far right of the graph and the pressure is very low. The momentum forces of the gas take over. I am not sure if this happens much if at all in F1... because at full throttle your map is still set to deliver power so there would be still a moderate level of boost. I think what you are hearing is just compressor noises as the compressor speed swings up and down.

No. Surge is the low-flow-limit of the compressor. It occurs when the discharge flow is restricted (low engine revs or downstream throttles closed) and boost (compressor speed) is elevated.

The high-flow-limit of a compressor is called the "choke" limit. The compressor itself is restricting the flow.

gruntguru wrote:

Facts Only wrote:Its easy to say something is obvious, especially when you have 2 years of knowledge on what was the best solution.

"MGUH -> MGUK -> Wheels" was obvious to me the day the new formula was rumoured. If it was obvious to me, it would have been obvious to at least some of the engineers in a multi-million dollar design team.

What probably wasn't obvious to the design team is the extent to which you can recover directly from the MGU-H. No one besides the actual engine manufacturers know how much energy they're deploying to the MGU-K in total from ERS and MGU-H. When I asked for a ballpark estimate from the all knowing people on this forum, I got nothing, and still no one wants to hazard a guess for whatever reason. It's clear however that they're deploying more than 4MJ per lap. The battery itself can store more than 4MJ, you're simply not allowed to deploy more than 4 per lap from there to the MGU-K.

Also, when time is not on your side, plus you have an engineering challenge in the form of incredibly tight packaging on technologies you're essentially developing from the ground up, you'll miss a thing or two. Whether it be conceptual or with practical application. It's just human nature, there's always more wrong answers than less wrong ones, and it takes being completely wrong in order to become less wrong.

godlameroso wrote:When I asked for a ballpark estimate from the all knowing people on this forum, I got nothing, and still no one wants to hazard a guess for whatever reason.

Maybe you should have done a search eg on 1/1/2015 I said:

As to compressor and turbine work, I have done some rough calculations for two scenarios.

1. MAP = 3.5, EBP = 3.0Power(compressor) = 80 kW. Pt = 125 kW. Psurplus = 45 kW
2. MAP = 4.5, EBP = 4.0 Pc = 130 kW. Pt = 177 kW. Ps = 47 kW

The upshot is clearly line ball. Not much change in pumping losses, BMEP of the recip' machine nor surplus power from the turbo machinery. OTOH reducing the DP (by increasing EBP) to the following scenario might be useful.

3. MAP = 3.5, EBP = 3.5 Pc = 80 kW. Pt = 140 kW. Psurplus = 60 kW That's a 15 kW improvement. The PMEP will increase by 0.5 Bar so BMEP reduces to 37.5 and crankshaft work suffers by about 7.5 kW

All the above calculations are based on steady state flow, any harvesting of blowdown energy will obviously improve the numbers.

godlameroso wrote:

gruntguru wrote:

Facts Only wrote:Its easy to say something is obvious, especially when you have 2 years of knowledge on what was the best solution.

"MGUH -> MGUK -> Wheels" was obvious to me the day the new formula was rumoured. If it was obvious to me, it would have been obvious to at least some of the engineers in a multi-million dollar design team.

What probably wasn't obvious to the design team is the extent to which you can recover directly from the MGU-H. No one besides the actual engine manufacturers know how much energy they're deploying to the MGU-K in total from ERS and MGU-H. When I asked for a ballpark estimate from the all knowing people on this forum, I got nothing, and still no one wants to hazard a guess for whatever reason. It's clear however that they're deploying more than 4MJ per lap. The battery itself can store more than 4MJ, you're simply not allowed to deploy more than 4 per lap from there to the MGU-K.

Also, when time is not on your side, plus you have an engineering challenge in the form of incredibly tight packaging on technologies you're essentially developing from the ground up, you'll miss a thing or two. Whether it be conceptual or with practical application. It's just human nature, there's always more wrong answers than less wrong ones, and it takes being completely wrong in order to become less wrong.

I would guess that Merc can do 6-8mj of electrical energy per lap.

I think there maybe a confusion of terminology regarding compressor surge and stall. To simplify things, compressor surge is when the air pressure after is higher than what the compressor can maintain. This can sometimes cause the compressor to "back up" can cause to slow the compressor down and cause a "stall". This can lead to catastrophic of the compressor itself. The most common cause of this is when the compressor itself is too large for the ICE. I am sure this phenomenon is not occurring with the current F1 PU's.

gruntguru wrote:

Facts Only wrote:Its easy to say something is obvious, especially when you have 2 years of knowledge on what was the best solution.

"MGUH -> MGUK -> Wheels" was obvious to me the day the new formula was rumoured. If it was obvious to me, it would have been obvious to at least some of the engineers in a multi-million dollar design team.

Get your application in:

http://www.renaultsportf1.com/Power-Uni ... ml?lang=fr

They need people of your calibre who know everything.

Facts Only wrote:

gruntguru wrote:

Facts Only wrote:Its easy to say something is obvious, especially when you have 2 years of knowledge on what was the best solution.

"MGUH -> MGUK -> Wheels" was obvious to me the day the new formula was rumoured. If it was obvious to me, it would have been obvious to at least some of the engineers in a multi-million dollar design team.

Get your application in:

http://www.renaultsportf1.com/Power-Uni ... ml?lang=fr

They need people of your calibre who know everything.

Merc will probably send some people to viry ( like they did last year with ferrari ) to sort things up...
And is is as I have said before, it is in Merc intrest that Renault becomes competitive...

godlameroso wrote: When I asked for a ballpark estimate from the all knowing people on this forum, I got nothing, and still no one wants to hazard a guess for whatever reason. It's clear however that they're deploying more than 4MJ per lap. The battery itself can store more than 4MJ, you're simply not allowed to deploy more than 4 per lap from there to the MGU-K.

Omnicorse in their race previews use simulation to give an indication of MGU-K and MGU-H generation.

Translated from here...

http://www.omnicorse.it/magazine/63023/ ... ella-mgu-h


The Belgian circuit allows a good recovery of energy during braking with the MGU-K, while it is maximum exploitation of the MGU-H which recovers energy from the exhaust gases because the track is the longest and has the longest duration of full power. The best power unit will have more power, the result of a good charging of the hybrid that will save petrol. On this track Wintax Marelli calculates you can recover 1,044 kJ braking with MGU-K and 3,356 kJ in acceleration with the MGU-H for a total of 4,400 kJ per lap, the highest seen so far. The contribution of the ERS performance on this circuit could be decisive as corresponds to 3 "5 per lap and can be worth up to 20 km / h top speed.

I think that really demonstrates how reliant the PU is on MGU-H generation.

https://twitter.com/NobleF1/status/694091566886027265 Edit:
And another very good Interview with Arai.

After their abscence from F1 they were "suffering from what athletes call a "lack of match sharpness."

"The three test runs we conducted before the season proved useless.
Up until the Spanish Grand Prix in May, it was like playing whack-a-mole: As soon as we resolved one problem, another popped up. Though we don't disclose the number of people involved in our F1 team, about half of them are new to the field."

"... McLaren once told us that we don't have to be aggressive in downsizing our power unit. But we are determined to shrink the size by whatever means possible."

http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Compani ... rough-year

Let's hope they have all tht sorted out for 2016. Looks like they are way better prepared this Year.

gruntguru wrote:

Facts Only wrote:Its easy to say something is obvious, especially when you have 2 years of knowledge on what was the best solution.

"MGUH -> MGUK -> Wheels" was obvious to me the day the new formula was rumoured. If it was obvious to me, it would have been obvious to at least some of the engineers in a multi-million dollar design team.

I think that's very hugely simplified. Of course they will have considered the possibility, but you are forgetting that we are talking about rule sets back in 2011 that was changing by the day and which was not visible for the public. These guys do not deal with rumors.

Anyway, Arai mentioned this on the upcoming second generation Honda PU: http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/analy ... 16-670525/

EDIT: Thunders beat me to it. Different website, same interview.