F1technical.net

Brian Coat wrote:Daimler combustion R&D "...puts any challenger into a big disadvantage or even contending with them impossible. The only company coming close to this might be VW/Audi/Porsche. "

Does anyone share my view that BMW or Ford (cited above) would not have anything much to fear from Stuttgart or Brixworth, with respect to reciprocating engine combustion research capability.

A pure assumption because of the wide array of gasoline and Diesel engines developed by Mercedes for trucks as well. Maybe I should do more research but from the outside it looks like BMW is busy with improvements outside the chamber (Vanos, ED, electric) and Ford with reletive old gasoline engines.

Ford are hardy going to return without a partner such as Cosworth to do the hard work.

I was talking about combustion system capability, not race engine capability.

For race engine capability Daimler needed a partner too & they 'loved it so much they bought the company!'

FPV GTHO wrote:Ford are hardy going to return without a partner such as Cosworth to do the hard work.

All the good people from Cosworth have been snatched by the big names, the company just ain't what it used to be, though, they're still Cosworth with a capital C.

godlameroso wrote:

FPV GTHO wrote:Ford are hardy going to return without a partner such as Cosworth to do the hard work.

All the good people from Cosworth have been snatched by the big names, the company just ain't what it used to be, though, they're still Cosworth with a capital C.

In hindsight, the jump from frozen V8 engines to hybrid V6T PU's with fuel flow restrictions might have been to big. All the special racing engine engineering companies are more evolutionary.

The better way should have been IMO: V10 -> V6T with air restrictor -V6T air res. with KERS -> current hybrid PU.

Now companies like Cosworth haven't got a chance.

Jolle wrote:

godlameroso wrote:Now companies like Cosworth haven't got a chance.

Companies like Cosworth never did unless they had major manufacturer backing.

wuzak wrote:

Jolle wrote:

godlameroso wrote:Now companies like Cosworth haven't got a chance.

Companies like Cosworth never did unless they had major manufacturer backing.

Ford and Cosworth were a great pair in that sense.

Here: http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/0 ... 25_a1b.pdf

..is a an interesting bit of research from nearly 60 years ago into combustion efficiency/power output - utilizing skipped firing..
& although it is done on a 2T test engine, could it be.. that the principles are in application, in F1 currently?

I couldn't download it for some reason but if it's a 'walking' cylinder cut then my opinion is quite possibly yes at light load because you can hear some such going on from the exhaust noise?

Are fuel catalysts allowed prior to fuel injection?

https://www.google.com/patents/US201001 ... 4Q6AEILDAC

https://www.google.com/patents/US201302 ... 4Q6AEIHjAA

https://www.google.com/patents/US7743754

https://www.google.com/patents/US4968396

Not sure this technology really offered what it promised.

The first guys secured a lot of funding but recently went out if business ...

https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?id ... 6565436561

Brian Coat wrote:Not sure this technology really offered what it promised.

The first guys secured a lot of funding but recently went out if business ...

https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?id ... 6565436561

Are they the guys that wanted to light the fire with sound waves? That would have the potential to ignite the entire charge at detonation-like speeds.

Brian Coat wrote:Not sure this technology really offered what it promised.

The first guys secured a lot of funding but recently went out if business ...

https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?id ... 6565436561

Companies go out of business for a lot of reasons. That De Boers guy has a nice CV heading Cosworth engine development for a number of years. For all we know the company sold its technology and closed up shop . Wouldn't be the first time that's happened. Happens all too often in the tech sector, Instagram, snap chat, etc.

gruntguru wrote:

Brian Coat wrote:Not sure this technology really offered what it promised.

The first guys secured a lot of funding but recently went out if business ...

https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?id ... 6565436561

Are they the guys that wanted to light the fire with sound waves? That would have the potential to ignite the entire charge at detonation-like speeds.

They wanted to create a system to use a heated catalyst element to pre-condition the fuel then use temperature and pressure to take the fuel to a supercritical state and finally inject it in the traditional sense. They had some success with a one cylinder prototype, and demonstrated that the concept worked. All the people involved were very established in their fields and from one day to the other the company closes.

Well ... They did have some good engineers and I'd be very happy if it was indeed the next big breakthrough.

But I cannot find facts to support the PR the company put out in 2010, suggesting efficiency improvements of 50+%

Their published single cylinder work claimed ITE ca. 45% which would be a BTE of what? 38% (+/-) in a normal 4 cyl road car engine.

That is pretty darn good, but nothing to over-excite the current F1 guys or say a Prius is it, let alone a "+50% improvement."?