F1technical.net

Charlatan wrote:

Vortex37 wrote:Scarbs says that the key to Mercedes superiority is the layout of the turbo/MGU/compressor.
...

Which has very little to do with it. MHPE's superiority is all in the interaction between MGU-H and MGU-K, peak-power is probably about the same for all, but the ability to produce said peak power anywhere around the track is where it's at.

Vortex37 snarkly wrote:Scarbs says that the key to Mercedes superiority is the layout of the turbo/MGU/compressor. Then people repeatedly claim that this is the silver bullet(pun) that gives them a zillion more horsepower. Ron Dennis says that the Honda engine uses technology that has never been used in F1 before, and Scarbs says that the Honda uses an axial compressor. Everybody and their granny in the blogosphere jumps on that as the revolutionary element. Hmm! So what makes me think of a herd of sheep.

You need to take my whole quote, otherwise it is way way out of context. The last sentence says it all.

WilliamsF1 wrote:I don't think the stages of an axial compressor are defined in the FIA regulations. While it is commonly stated as multi stage it is not the same as a centrifugal multi stage where the air moves from one housing to another. In a axial compressor it is just a series of rotating blades separated by guide vanes all within the same housing so the entire thing should be one stage unless FIA rule book says otherwise.

No, it is not definied in the published rules.

But multiple rotors in an axial compressor are defined as multi stage even though they are in the same housing.

Centrifugal multi-stahe compressors are rare - at least in automotive applications.

shady wrote:

wuzak wrote:
The stator ("nozzle") is not necessary if you build teh stages with counter rotation every second rotor.

Cant counter rotate, it contravenes the tech regs. (5.1.6)

So do multiple stages.

shady wrote:With a CBC you can effectively unify the stator and rotor in what I would consider a single stage. The efficacy of that construction in an ICE is still a ways off..

What is CBC?

wuzak wrote: Most axial compressors have a single entry and a single exit.

Not sure what you mean by "single chamber". The space between two stators?

If you take a low bypass turban as an example, what in saying is that for all intents and purposes, the "high pressure compressor" section is a single stage or compression chamber.

I'm merely suggesting that a competent legal argument could possibly use that comparison to argue a multi-blade axial compressor is a single stage and the only advantage over a radial compressor it's packaging.

shady wrote:With a CBC you can effectively unify the stator and rotor in what I would consider a single stage. The efficacy of that construction in an ICE is still a ways off..

What is CBC?[/quote]

Continuous blade compressor

http://i.imgur.com/XKzqYCP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RvUYePi.jpg

wuzak wrote:

WilliamsF1 wrote:I don't think the stages of an axial compressor are defined in the FIA regulations. While it is commonly stated as multi stage it is not the same as a centrifugal multi stage where the air moves from one housing to another. In a axial compressor it is just a series of rotating blades separated by guide vanes all within the same housing so the entire thing should be one stage unless FIA rule book says otherwise.

No, it is not definied in the published rules.

But multiple rotors in an axial compressor are defined as multi stage even though they are in the same housing.

Centrifugal multi-stahe compressors are rare - at least in automotive applications.

I think a multi rotor axial compressor has 2 Xs against it....

1- The rules say you can't use more than 1 stage.
2- The rules use the term "single compression" or something like that...it's been a few days.

So I think it is unlikely that it will have more than 1 rotor.

Although, I believe it has been well documented in these pages that with the space that we have based on where it's placed it has to be either Axial and/or dual boost.

In either case it will be a long time before we get a picture of it ......reminds me of the picture of the Ferrari in-V inter-cooler from ..was that Monaco in 2014 ?

As much fun as it is and how smart some of the people in these pages are...we're all just guessing.

djos wrote:If you take a low bypass turban as an example, what in saying is that for all intents and purposes, the "high pressure compressor" section is a single stage or compression chamber.

It is a single compressor. It is not a single stage compressor.

djos wrote:I'm merely suggesting that a competent legal argument could possibly use that comparison to argue a multi-blade axial compressor is a single stage and the only advantage over a radial compressor it's packaging.

I'd suggest that a half competent adversary would be able to mount a counter argument and win.

wuzak wrote:

djos wrote:If you take a low bypass turban as an example, what in saying is that for all intents and purposes, the "high pressure compressor" section is a single stage or compression chamber.

It is a single compressor. It is not a single stage compressor.

djos wrote:I'm merely suggesting that a competent legal argument could possibly use that comparison to argue a multi-blade axial compressor is a single stage and the only advantage over a radial compressor it's packaging.

I'd suggest that a half competent adversary would be able to mount a counter argument and win.

All good points, sure is fun to discuss tho.

shady wrote: Continuous blade compressor

http://i.imgur.com/XKzqYCP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RvUYePi.jpg

Oooh, interesting!

I'm sure there is a very good engineering definition of what constitutes "multi stage".

As I explained several posts back, rotodynamic machines compress air by accelerating it to a high velocity then slowing it back down to a low velocity/high pressure. This constitutes a "stage". If the air is accelerated and slowed more than once, you have a multi stage compressor and the rule has been violated. The "guide vanes" are "stators" or "diffusers", their function being to slow the air down.

djos wrote:

shady wrote: Continuous blade compressor

http://i.imgur.com/XKzqYCP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RvUYePi.jpg

Oooh, interesting!

That is not likely to have a sufficiently high PR.

gruntguru wrote:I'm sure there is a very good engineering definition of what constitutes "multi stage".

As I explained several posts back, rotodynamic machines compress air by accelerating it to a high velocity then slowing it back down to a low velocity/high pressure. This constitutes a "stage". If the air is accelerated and slowed more than once, you have a multi stage compressor and the rule has been violated. The "guide vanes" are "stators" or "diffusers", their function being to slow the air down.

This shows the velocity and pressure as the air goes through the stages.

I would have expected a less smooth curve for pressure, more like a series of straight lines.

Agree. I think they have just drawn a smooth curve through the data points (one for each stage.)

OTOH the total pressure (static plus dynamic) might increase progressively in the rotor blade section as energy is imparted but should not increase in the stator section.

Nice find BTW.

Honda F1 Website:

Interesting renderings of the PU's:

Oh dear!