Are offset cylinder engines allowed in F1?

[Tommy Cookers]

1....The other was 'pulling down (by design) cylinders in the block in relation to crankshaft horizontal centerline on ''VEE ENGINES'' ''INCLUDING IN F1 RACING), This design actually pushed cylinder banks of a VEE ENGINE not only lower, but further apart and out of main bearing centerline.
2....FORD MODEL A V8, Ford moved both cylinder banks the same amount and together off crankshaft main bearing centerline. (cylinder blocks were moved both the same amount 'sideways' (to the driver's side).
3.... pistons pin offset ....

1 yes of course (eg Lancia V4) raising/lowering the bores relative to the crankshaft is another name for offset but ....
handed (one bank/direction other bank/other direction) means some cylinders advantaged & some disadvantaged

2 yes of course if both banks same direction offset as the 1932 Ford V8 etc the 'advantages' will obtain on all cylinders

either offset will increase peak piston and piston ring acceleration

the most useful point in the video was the likely dwell advantage to the power stroke (like using a shorter rod)
handy for the inline 4 race superbike engine example
the price is of course increased piston and piston ring acceleration

3 piston pin offset is in principle independent of above offsets - and likely used eg in late NA F1
because afaik gas loads and piston cg were off-centre in such 20000rpm 94 bore engines
at such very high rpm and low mep piston friction work from inertial loads is much higher than from combustion loads

[gruntguru]

. . . The original scope of gain of the 'desaxe' cylinders was solely aimed at mechanical leverage. . . .

Although desaxe does change the ratio of piston force to crankshaft torque at some crankshaft positions, there is no net "mechanical leverage" advantage. Many weird mechanisms have been invented to increase "leverage" but any such mechanisms equally suffer from a reduction in crank angle over which the extra torque is obtained. Result is no increase in average torque.

[saviour stivala]

Each side bank of the Volkswagen VR engine is offset on opposite sides of the crankshaft centerline, +/- 12.5 mm on the 15 degree VR'S and +/- 22 mm on the newer 10.6 degree variant. I have also read that this practice was also used in the more recent F1 days (to lower CoG). The effect of the offset is a function of the ratio with con-rod length. The stroke of a 'desaxe' engine is not the same as the crank throw, intake and power stroke are spread over more than 180 degree.

[saviour stivala]

. . . The original scope of gain of the 'desaxe' cylinders was solely aimed at mechanical leverage. . . .

Although desaxe does change the ratio of piston force to crankshaft torque at some crankshaft positions, there is no net "mechanical leverage" advantage. Many weird mechanisms have been invented to increase "leverage" but any such mechanisms equally suffer from a reduction in crank angle over which the extra torque is obtained. Result is no increase in average torque.

"desaxe cylinders and the mechanical leverage advantage" One can easily verify the mechanical leverage advantage by setting the bicycle crank pedal at one o/clock and two o/clock and see which position makes it the easer to move-on.

[Greg Locock]

One can indeed perform that misleading experiment. The indicated work from one cycle of the engine is integral p(v) dv. Note that desaxe slightly modifies the p(v) function, but not much.