Conceptual engine regulations

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
johnny comelately
johnny comelately
75
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Conceptual engine regulations

Post

Zynerji wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:45 am
vorticism wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:19 am
Creative spin on things there, Zynerji. A turbo assisted pulse jet, I don't think has ever existed (the pulse jet inefficiencies will be pointed out). My take on it would be to replace the combustors on a turbojet with pulse jets. This would be for an aesthetic touch not necessarily a performance gain--again we're in the age of race cars with styling ballast. Although, higher combustion pressures in the combustor might be valuable. It could provide an entertaining sound if tuned properly--most pulsejets I've heard are relatively low Hz. If ganged up in multiples and timed with spark ignition or valve control you could increase the pitch of the pulses to approximate an F1 NA sound. So, one MGUH-turbo-multi-pulsejet (MGUPJ?) driving your axle MGUs.

You need to dump braking MGU energy somehow if you're going to have motor braking, possibly through driving the MGUPJ and porting the MGUPJ compressor outfeed forward for a small reverse thrust. The only cooling you'll need will be for the motors, control electronics, and oil. Relatively small radiators.

Otherwise I'm in support of this as the nemesis EV. The CEV -- combustion electric vehicle.* Mwahaha. All though this is actually the definition of all EVs after the green paint is removed.
I meant turbo jet... 😬

Just imagine this with current F1 turbos, and you will see what I mean.

Its not that quick, didnt even need a helmet :wink:

User avatar
Zynerji
108
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Conceptual engine regulations

Post

That's just thrust. How much would 2 mguh output at that rpm?

gruntguru
gruntguru
547
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: Conceptual engine regulations

Post

johnny comelately wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:47 am
Its not that quick, didnt even need a helmet :wink:
What could possibly go wrong?
je suis charlie

User avatar
vorticism
103
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2022 7:20 pm

Re: Conceptual engine regulations

Post

johnny comelately wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:24 am
vorticism wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:00 pm
johnny comelately wrote: ↑
Tue Sep 06, 2022 1:52 am
Percentage of a theoretical perfect inlet fill event by a novel gas exchange design.
The best 4 valve engines achieve high 30's%
Actual flow at 10 inches = 246cfm
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca88777 ... eGLgM3efCo
Well when you say novel I guess you really mean it--this being an atypical valve arrangement? What else can you tell us about this?
In development at dyno stage.
I am retired from the project
Air cooled, showing one advantage of methanol.
Top fuel drag bike application.

Single rotary valve for gas exchange.
For cylinder fill it is like opening the garage door, so in the early stages it only needed 22 psi.(supercharger superceded with turbo)
2.3 litre swept. 10.5 static.
500bhp @ 5000 rpm on the dyno for a 10000rpm engine
Methanol with nitro up the sleeve, twin fuel injectors with a normal return to tank system.
The drawback with a rotary valve is it compromises the chamber shape.
The key to rotary valves is the seal design, this one worked and worked well.
Twin flame ignition which needed only 26 degrees advance, greatly reducing what we call pumping losses.
BSFC numbers are sad which relates to the proposed F1 fuel specs
Interesting. If the seals are worked out then you have to wonder why you wouldn't use rotary valves in a racing engine. I think some of those downsides you mentions could be managed. What would say about using them on a high compression application like modern F1 or diesel.

User avatar
vorticism
103
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2022 7:20 pm

Re: Conceptual engine regulations

Post

Zynerji wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:45 am
vorticism wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:19 am
Creative spin on things there, Zynerji. A turbo assisted pulse jet, I don't think has ever existed (the pulse jet inefficiencies will be pointed out). My take on it would be to replace the combustors on a turbojet with pulse jets. This would be for an aesthetic touch not necessarily a performance gain--again we're in the age of race cars with styling ballast. Although, higher combustion pressures in the combustor might be valuable. It could provide an entertaining sound if tuned properly--most pulsejets I've heard are relatively low Hz. If ganged up in multiples and timed with spark ignition or valve control you could increase the pitch of the pulses to approximate an F1 NA sound. So, one MGUH-turbo-multi-pulsejet (MGUPJ?) driving your axle MGUs.
You need to dump braking MGU energy somehow if you're going to have motor braking, possibly through driving the MGUPJ and porting the MGUPJ compressor outfeed forward for a small reverse thrust. The only cooling you'll need will be for the motors, control electronics, and oil. Relatively small radiators.
Otherwise I'm in support of this as the nemesis EV. The CEV -- combustion electric vehicle.* Mwahaha. All though this is actually the definition of all EVs after the green paint is removed.
Zero brake recovery. All carbon/carbon deceleration. πŸ˜‹
I meant turbo jet... 😬
Just imagine this with current F1 turbos. Especially with VNT for more control.
No harm done, we've ended up inventing the turbopulsejet in the span of two posts.

johnny comelately
johnny comelately
75
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Conceptual engine regulations

Post

vorticism wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 12:54 pm
johnny comelately wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:24 am
vorticism wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:00 pm


Well when you say novel I guess you really mean it--this being an atypical valve arrangement? What else can you tell us about this?
In development at dyno stage.
I am retired from the project
Air cooled, showing one advantage of methanol.
Top fuel drag bike application.

Single rotary valve for gas exchange.
For cylinder fill it is like opening the garage door, so in the early stages it only needed 22 psi.(supercharger superceded with turbo)
2.3 litre swept. 10.5 static.
500bhp @ 5000 rpm on the dyno for a 10000rpm engine
Methanol with nitro up the sleeve, twin fuel injectors with a normal return to tank system.
The drawback with a rotary valve is it compromises the chamber shape.
The key to rotary valves is the seal design, this one worked and worked well.
Twin flame ignition which needed only 26 degrees advance, greatly reducing what we call pumping losses.
BSFC numbers are sad which relates to the proposed F1 fuel specs
Interesting. If the seals are worked out then you have to wonder why you wouldn't use rotary valves in a racing engine. I think some of those downsides you mentions could be managed. What would say about using them on a high compression application like modern F1 or diesel.
Rules
thats why we have this thread