Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:53 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:45 pm
3000cc V10 max piston speed 347.293 ft/s. Three hundred and forty seven point two nine three feet per second.
but you wrote max piston acceleration is three hundred and forty seven point two nine three

that's why I questioned it (as not a credible value so maybe you meant three hundred and forty seven thousand etc)
Originally I wrote: 3000cc V10 max piston accel (ft/s) 347.293 ft/s. I went back and checked source actual technical text and can confirm as quoted correctly as per technical text.

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
594
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:18 am
Tommy Cookers wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:53 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:45 pm
3000cc V10 max piston speed 347.293 ft/s. Three hundred and forty seven point two nine three feet per second.
but you wrote max piston acceleration is three hundred and forty seven point two nine three

that's why I questioned it (as not a credible value so maybe you meant three hundred and forty seven thousand etc)
Originally I wrote: 3000cc V10 max piston accel (ft/s) 347.293 ft/s. I went back and checked source actual technical text and can confirm as quoted correctly as per technical text.
well you have correctly quoted a very incorrect technical text
347 ft/s/s being about 10 'g' (as I already pointed out)

63l8qrrfy6
63l8qrrfy6
368
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

Hoffman900 wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:48 pm
I also wonder that in regards to the 80 bar as I noticed that as well and have been doing some googling over the last ten minutes. I have no doubt they are holding some things tight to their chest.
Took me a while to find this but I knew I saw it somewhere:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/72775233.pdf
The purpose of the preceding study was to determine the theoretical maximum pressure in the cylinders. From the experimental data completed by Penske, the maximum cylinder pressure was 9.59MPa. The calculations give a maximum pressure of 14.8MPa. This is expected as ideal gas law calculation tend to give higher results than real-world results.
I think at 96 bar it's right on par with the F1 V10.

ACRO
ACRO
5
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:25 pm

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

the cylinder pressures as well the BMEP will probably be comparable between f1 und Nascar . the amazing point is that the late V10,s were able to keep the high bmep at that rpm,s .

regarding piston accleration : i agree with tommy cookers - the accleration was of course +10000g and not 10g . so it should be ~ 347000 ft/s/s and not 347ft/s/s .

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

Although the V10 era is said to have started by the introduction of the 3500cc NA engine formula in 1998 the first known V10 engine was created by Alfa Romeo in 1986. This engine never raced.
At the start of the formula V8, V10 and V12 engines were used. The first two V10 were by Renault and Honda.
Engine bank angles of 65, 67, 72, 75, 76, 80, 106 and finally the settled on 90 degree bank angles were used. These bank angles were used by the mix of V8’S V10’S and V12’s used. Mario Illien; ‘’ uneven fire is not a problem with the contemporary engine management system’’. Cosworth produced a 120 degree V10 which was never raced. But Renault produced the 106 degree V10 which was raced. (RS 21, 22 and 23. This (106 degree bank angle) three year Renault project, the bank angle has never been officially confirmed. It is said that the original intent of the Judd 76 degree bank angle V8 was 75 degree, but limitations in Judd’s CNC equipment (could only work in whole-degree increments) meant 76 degree was used instead.
Honda is said to have been the first to use finger cam followers in the V10 era. Renault was the only one to have driven a pair of camshafts on one bank from the front of the crankshaft and the other pair on the other bank from the rear of the crankshaft. The Peugeot V10 was the only known one to have used dry cylinder liners in their aluminium block, also the only one to have used ‘split’ roller main crankshaft bearings. Honda was the only one to have conformed to having developed and used MMC pistons. The Mercedes/Ilmor aluminium-beryllum pistons and liners were two separate developments, with beryllium pistons being used first. Contrary to many believe the Mercedes/Ilmor beryllum pistons were not the first having been produced, many years before that Porsche produced the first ever beryllium pistons, elsewhere on a different thread I have given details as to whom Porsche produced those beryllium pistons and why they did not use them themselves.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
509
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:45 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

Good information but what should the reader focus on there? V10 innovations? Or is this a chronicle on the V10 engines? If it is a chronicle I was looking out for the time stamps.
🖐️✌️☝️👀👌

====Zen level====
|||||||<@>||^||<@>|||||||

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

My last post in ‘engine bank angles used’ I inadvertently left out a bank angle of 94 degrees having been used of which was (confirmed by Honda) in 2002.

ACRO
ACRO
5
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:25 pm

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:
Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:01 pm
Good information but what should the reader focus on there? V10 innovations?
yes , innovations at that era. the basic goal was to pump and burn as much air / fuel mixture thru the engine out of a given displacement without any form of forced charging .

at an atmo the only way to increase this ( bmep was already pretty much stressed to physical limits ) were rpm,s and that resulted in some of the finest mechanical engineerings a piston engine ever saw , stretching any component inside it to its material limits.

today f1 engines approach another goal : to reach as much useful power as possible out of a given amount of fuel. that is a more sensful approach i agree but nowaday f1 engines are mechanical far less advanced than the late atmo ones.

you do not need it anymore because you can 'easily' reach the same goal with supercharging it . in fact the current engines could reach its power levels at even less rpm,s than its done now - its only to make the show not too boring .

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

‘’Innovations’’ and ‘’developments’’. Most of the ‘innovations’ have been used before but vastly developed on. New innovations ‘inventions’ were few and far in between.
Valve developments;- titanium (Ti) valves with 6mm stems were developed with stems being drilled 3mm leaving a ‘stem tube’ with a wall thickness of 1.5mm. They were 60% filled with sodium and some with netlium. Titanium aluminide (Ti AL) valves with a solid stem of 4.5mm were also developed and used before being banned.
Camshafts;- hollow camshafts with 3mm shaft wall thickness were developed with quill drive splines engaging the camshaft internal splines very near the camshaft centre by some, rendering camshaft drive as very near (centre drive). In an attempt to minimize oscillations/vibrations and camshaft twist, with cylinders furthest from the drive suffering the most. Some geared camshafts on each bank together both at front as well as at the back, with idler drive from crankshaft engaging only the inlet cam gear. Both rotating mass weights and silicon filled dampers at rear were used. Bigger bores meant bigger valves which in turn meant bigger valve lift. As much as 17mm valve lifts was reputed to have been used, this was achieved with same cam diameter cam or even smaller diameter with the help of finger cam follower leverage. The V10 era four valve head was developed with a compound valve angle, so that the two valves on each side were splayed rather than parallel to each other. The compound valve angle maximized valve size, to an extent that could see intake valve area reach as much as 39% of bore area. It also provided superior airflow, with less masking of the valves and it permitted a lower clearance volume (higher compression ratio). For the same valve area. When carbon-fibre valve covers were banned, cam bearing caps were incorporated/cast as one with aluminium valve covers.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

‘’Today’s F1 engines’’ (one undisclosed formula one engine designer) The approach is the same as it has always been in formula one racing. That is to ‘extract’ as much power as one could. First must come the quest for maximum power, then the quest to make the engine drivable. You need to find a compromise without spoiling to-end power. There is probably a range of combinations (intake, exhaust geometries, cam timing, and so forth), without spoiling top-end power. There is probably a range you need to find which combination that gives acceptable top-end power and you need to find which combination gives the lowest penalty in terms of power lower down.

User avatar
hollus
Moderator
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

@ Stivala:
In that Today's F1 engines paragraph... is "today" 2020 or the V10 era?
I would like to see a paleontologist.

ACRO
ACRO
5
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:25 pm

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 12:31 pm
The approach is the same as it has always been in formula one racing. That is to ‘extract’ as much power as one could.
yes , of course .

like said in the V10 era the goal was to squeeze as much power as it gets out of a naturally aspirated 3000ccm 4 stroke .

today the goal is to squeeze as much power as it gets out of a given amount of fuel flow .

additional specs were made to control the costs out of this basic rules .

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

hollus wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:55 am
@ Stivala:
In that Today's F1 engines paragraph... is "today" 2020 or the V10 era?
The approach is the same as it has always been in formula one. (and I don't think it will ever change(.That is to 'extract' as much power as one could. First comes the quest for maximum power. If you haven't got 'top-end' power you are dead.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
45
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

ACRO wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 3:45 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Thu Sep 03, 2020 12:31 pm
The approach is the same as it has always been in formula one racing. That is to ‘extract’ as much power as one could.
yes , of course .

like said in the V10 era the goal was to squeeze as much power as it gets out of a naturally aspirated 3000ccm 4 stroke .

today the goal is to squeeze as much power as it gets out of a given amount of fuel flow .

additional specs were made to control the costs out of this basic rules .
Naturally aspirated 3000ccm 4 stroke was the last engine formula in the V10 era. The approach was exactly as it is today, (with today's engine formula). That is to 'extract' as much power as one could. First comes the quest for maximum power. That is something that had never changed.

ACRO
ACRO
5
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:25 pm

Re: Mercedes V10 F1 Engine - Picture Thread

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 4:03 pm
The approach was exactly as it is today, (with today's engine formula). That is to 'extract' as much power as one could. First comes the quest for maximum power. That is something that had never changed.
i fully agree , like already written above .

you can say that the basic approach on anything always was and always will be to win the race .

engine rules by FIA always were made to keep the power outputs at an acceptable level for safety reasons while the engineers tried and will try to reach more power out of given rules.

in the V10 era the basic rule to 'limit' the output was a maximum permitted displacement on an atmo engine . since many other things were not regulated it resulted in heavy developing , enourmous costs and engines reaching power outputs which started to leave the comfort zone of FIA in relation to safety concerns as well to the costs .

trying to limit further increase in output and also costs things like rev limiting and minimum mileage out of an engine were introduced.

today , with if course the same goal to have the best engine and car - to win the race - we have sonce 2014 a new approach to control power output levels and costs : limit the amount of fuelflow .

since there are physical limits what an piston engine can extract in useful power out of the overall energy stored in a droplet of petrol fuel you could leave everything else free .

the only reason its a 1.6litre V6 is to spec it to a common basic design for every team and prevent very costly different approaches how to extract the most power out of the overall energy stored in the fuel.