F1technical.net

wuzak wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 02:09

Could these butterflies be part of the variable inlet system?

100%

Zynerji wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 00:37

gruntguru wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 00:21

Agree with @mudflap. Highly unlikely (and probably illegal) to operate butterflies at valve train frequency. You would be talking six actuators operating at very high speed. It is hard enough to get the intake valves to operate at these speeds - butterflies as well???

Using Miller cycle to help homogenise main-chamber mix - quite possible - interesting idea.

On definitions Atkinson cycle describes the general family of engines with CR<ER including those using weird mechanisms. (eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNsJOsnuIMA)

Miller cycle is a subset of these using valve timing to reduce CR without affecting ER.

It is proven that the "butterflies" exist as I've described. They look like an oddly formed cam shaft, so 3 cylinders operated per shaft.

At this point, how is there still an argument? It would only make sense that it would operate at valve train speeds as synchronization would obviously be required.

Can I read about these proven butterflies somewhere?

In Russia, the two ferraris were instructed to save fuel during the lap 1 SC. Does this mean they started with 110 kg in the fuel tank? I assumed that this happens only on very fuel intense tracks like singapure. It would also indicate that at last the ferrari engine is still fuel limited.

hurril wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 08:04

Zynerji wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 00:37

gruntguru wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 00:21

Agree with @mudflap. Highly unlikely (and probably illegal) to operate butterflies at valve train frequency. You would be talking six actuators operating at very high speed. It is hard enough to get the intake valves to operate at these speeds - butterflies as well???

Using Miller cycle to help homogenise main-chamber mix - quite possible - interesting idea.

On definitions Atkinson cycle describes the general family of engines with CR<ER including those using weird mechanisms. (eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNsJOsnuIMA)

Miller cycle is a subset of these using valve timing to reduce CR without affecting ER.

It is proven that the "butterflies" exist as I've described. They look like an oddly formed cam shaft, so 3 cylinders operated per shaft.

At this point, how is there still an argument? It would only make sense that it would operate at valve train speeds as synchronization would obviously be required.

Can I read about these proven butterflies somewhere?

I made a post with the article about the Honda Cackle engine sound. Search it up.

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:23

hurril wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 08:04

Zynerji wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 00:37

It is proven that the "butterflies" exist as I've described. They look like an oddly formed cam shaft, so 3 cylinders operated per shaft.

At this point, how is there still an argument? It would only make sense that it would operate at valve train speeds as synchronization would obviously be required.

Can I read about these proven butterflies somewhere?

I made a post with the article about the Honda Cackle engine sound. Search it up.

I can only find claims by you based on bad assumptions on what the/a VLIM is and what a butterfly valve is. Do you have a source for your claims?

hurril wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:30

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:23

hurril wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2019, 08:04

Can I read about these proven butterflies somewhere?

I made a post with the article about the Honda Cackle engine sound. Search it up.

I can only find claims by you based on bad assumptions on what the/a VLIM is and what a butterfly valve is. Do you have a source for your claims?

I see. IIRC, there were pictures, and even someone that had built one like I described, and said it had a positive effect.

I don't have time nor inclination to go find it, but I'm guessing you were one of the vocal detractors that provided no counter evidence?

This is a bit like asking us to prove that god doesnt exist rather than you proving that he does.

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:46

hurril wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:30

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:23

I made a post with the article about the Honda Cackle engine sound. Search it up.

I can only find claims by you based on bad assumptions on what the/a VLIM is and what a butterfly valve is. Do you have a source for your claims?

I see. IIRC, there were pictures, and even someone that had built one like I described, and said it had a positive effect.

I don't have time nor inclination to go find it, but I'm guessing you were one of the vocal detractors that provided no counter evidence?

No I was not but now I know your role.

hurril wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 09:43

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:46

hurril wrote: ↑

I can only find claims by you based on bad assumptions on what the/a VLIM is and what a butterfly valve is. Do you have a source for your claims?

I see. IIRC, there were pictures, and even someone that had built one like I described, and said it had a positive effect.

I don't have time nor inclination to go find it, but I'm guessing you were one of the vocal detractors that provided no counter evidence?

No I was not but now I know your role.

You only know what you are shown.

"All you know about me is what I've sold you
Dumb ---
I sold out long before you ever heard my name
I sold my soul to make a record
Dip ---
And you bought one"

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 15:42

hurril wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 09:43

Zynerji wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2019, 00:46

I see. IIRC, there were pictures, and even someone that had built one like I described, and said it had a positive effect.

I don't have time nor inclination to go find it, but I'm guessing you were one of the vocal detractors that provided no counter evidence?

No I was not but now I know your role.

You only know what you are shown.

"All you know about me is what I've sold you
Dumb ---
I sold out long before you ever heard my name
I sold my soul to make a record
Dip ---
And you bought one"

I have no beef with you and I don't want one. I just wanted to read the proof that you had.

Hello, I'm new to this particular topic as it's all way over my head. So please excuse the lack of knowledge from me but I often come with random questions. Hopefully I can just drop my brain f*rts here and see who says they smell good or bad. I won't be offended if everyone says they smell rotten!

I've tried to do my own research but couldn't find what I was looking for, most likely down to my poor search terms and the fact I don't actually know what I'm talking about.

Anyway, on with it...
Could there any benefit (if permitted by the regs) to running a 1.6l v6 as a 4 cylinder engine? Same fuel flow rate so each cylinder ends up with 50% more fuel per combustion cycle (is that even the right terminology )?

Would something like that increase acceleration at the expense of top speed or vice versa? And then switch back to normal V6 mode?

Like I said, I've got no idea what I'm talking about but hey, it's a question. And judging by the past few pages (didn't have time to read all 633) you people are the experts!

If you could remove the pumping and frictional losses associated with the extra 2 cylinders that don't do anything and provided that your working 4 cylinders could cope with the increased thermal and mechanical loads associated with operating at higher duty then yes, there could be a thermal efficiency gain.

Mudflap wrote: ↑

07 Nov 2019, 17:19

If you could remove the pumping and frictional losses associated with the extra 2 cylinders that don't do anything and provided that your working 4 cylinders could cope with the increased thermal and mechanical loads associated with operating at higher duty then yes, there could be a thermal efficiency gain.

Pumping losses would be relatively easy to minimize, they run individual throttle bodies so just keep the two deactivated throttles fully open.
But what would the advantage be??

Holm86 wrote: ↑

07 Nov 2019, 20:58

Mudflap wrote: ↑

07 Nov 2019, 17:19

If you could remove the pumping and frictional losses associated with the extra 2 cylinders that don't do anything and provided that your working 4 cylinders could cope with the increased thermal and mechanical loads associated with operating at higher duty then yes, there could be a thermal efficiency gain.

Pumping losses would be relatively easy to minimize, they run individual throttle bodies so just keep the two deactivated throttles fully open.
But what would the advantage be??

Lower heat losses from smaller effective combustions surface.

Also throttles are not individually operated.

Its a great question. When this formula first appeared I held the view that in the absence of the 1.6 litre capacity regulation, the optimum engine size would have been something smaller - perhaps 1 litre with 3 or 4 cylinders. So, whats to stop the the teams deactivating 2 or 3 cylinders permanently - no piston crown and no rings would reduce pumping and friction?

They certainly deactivate cylinders already - at part load. More efficient to run 3 cylinders at full load than 6 cylinders at 1/2 load.