Concept power units from 2030

[Farnborough]

Currently, the MGU K is driving into the front end of crankshaft, I believe for all makes.

Which means that the crankshaft is used as "driveshaft" to gearbox route and not independent. The IC and the E both share the output to clutch effectively to make them fully coupled.

Whether that will be same for 2026 is not disclosed anywhere public, that I'm aware of.

[wuzak]

Currently, the MGU K is driving into the front end of crankshaft, I believe for all makes.

Which means that the crankshaft is used as "driveshaft" to gearbox route and not independent. The IC and the E both share the output to clutch effectively to make them fully coupled.

Whether that will be same for 2026 is not disclosed anywhere public, that I'm aware of.

5.20.3 All mechanical power to and from the MGU-K must pass through a single shaft to the MGU-K transmission. The connection to the ICE crankshaft must be ahead of XPU=100.

XPU=0 is the forward mounting plane of the PU/ICE.

So the connection of the MGUK to the ICE is to the front of the crankshaft.

For reference, XPU = 480 is the position of the gearbox casing mounting faces.

[wuzak]

This must be why there is concern that the ICE will be at full revs around places like Lowes hairpin in Monaco — as ICE will mostly act as a recharge facility for the batteries so that constant torque is available from the motor to drive the rear wheels. Like a diesel train, essentially? Because it’s so efficient, and efficiency will win the race with the way they are going with power units in 2026. Hope that’s correct.

Well, if they can rev the engine in neutral it's possible, I think. Otherwise I don't think such gearing exists to do full revs.

The driver would have to put it in neutral and then select 1st after.

The computer can't decide when to change gears, only reject gear changes to protect the engine.

[mzso]

This must be why there is concern that the ICE will be at full revs around places like Lowes hairpin in Monaco — as ICE will mostly act as a recharge facility for the batteries so that constant torque is available from the motor to drive the rear wheels. Like a diesel train, essentially? Because it’s so efficient, and efficiency will win the race with the way they are going with power units in 2026. Hope that’s correct.

Well, if they can rev the engine in neutral it's possible, I think. Otherwise I don't think such gearing exists to do full revs.

Isn't an engine capable to rev at full revs in all the gears, or better put, aren't all gear designed/calculated so as the engine can reach full revs in each one?.

Sure, but there's no reason to have gearing that maxes out rpm at hairpin speeds

[mzso]

This must be why there is concern that the ICE will be at full revs around places like Lowes hairpin in Monaco — as ICE will mostly act as a recharge facility for the batteries so that constant torque is available from the motor to drive the rear wheels. Like a diesel train, essentially? Because it’s so efficient, and efficiency will win the race with the way they are going with power units in 2026. Hope that’s correct.

Well, if they can rev the engine in neutral it's possible, I think. Otherwise I don't think such gearing exists to do full revs.

The driver would have to put it in neutral and then select 1st after.

The computer can't decide when to change gears, only reject gear changes to protect the engine.

Wouldn't the clutch be enough?

[saviour stivala]

Well, if they can rev the engine in neutral it's possible, I think. Otherwise I don't think such gearing exists to do full revs.

Isn't an engine capable to rev at full revs in all the gears, or better put, aren't all gear designed/calculated so as the engine can reach full revs in each one?.

Sure, but there's no reason to have gearing that maxes out rpm at hairpin speeds

Agree with that.

[wuzak]

Well, if they can rev the engine in neutral it's possible, I think. Otherwise I don't think such gearing exists to do full revs.

The driver would have to put it in neutral and then select 1st after.

The computer can't decide when to change gears, only reject gear changes to protect the engine.

Wouldn't the clutch be enough?

Yes, but also has to be manually operated.

The clutch can be operated by the computer for very brief periods.

But, there is a rule about partial throttle fuel flow.

5.4.5 At partial load, the fuel energy flow must not exceed the limit curve defined below:
• EF (MJ/h) = 380 when the engine power is equal to or below -50kW
• EF (MJ/h) = 9.78 x engine power (kW) + 869 when the engine power is above -50kW

If the "engine power" is 0kW, the fuel flow would allow approximately 100kW to be generated using the ICE as a generator.

Though I'm not sure what they mean by "engine power".

Maybe demand?

[Tommy Cookers]

broadly ....
the above is saying that WOT the ICE is effectively a constant torque device
so from 2026 the MGU-K can't be a constant power device
it won't get much generation if only doing 30% rpm - only about 30% of 350 kW

[wuzak]

broadly ....
the above is saying that WOT the ICE is effectively a constant torque device
so from 2026 the MGU-K can't be a constant power device
it won't get much generation if only doing 30% rpm - only about 30% of 350 kW

The above is for partial demand.

The maximum fuel flow is = (0.27 * rpm + 165) MJ/h, maximum 3,000MJ/h (10,500rpm and above).

[DenBommer]

What do you think of this motor:

Something for after 2030?

[bananapeel23]

Are we realistically going to see new PUs in 2030? That would mean the 2026 ones only last 4 years. I feel like the teams will be reluctant to throw their years of R&D away after only 4 years?

Is the idea that the carryover from 2014 to 2026 will make the teams more willing to go to a completely new layout in 2030, since the 1.6L V6 will be a 16 year old layout by then?

[DenBommer]

Are we realistically going to see new PUs in 2030? That would mean the 2026 ones only last 4 years. I feel like the teams will be reluctant to throw their years of R&D away after only 4 years?

Is the idea that the carryover from 2014 to 2026 will make the teams more willing to go to a completely new layout in 2030, since the 1.6L V6 will be a 16 year old layout by then?

I don't mean right after 2030. But maybe more around 2033/34?

[mzso]

What do you think of this motor:

Something for after 2030?

On first glance (at the animation) the concept seems very similar to the radmax engine Zynerji mentioned.
The seals constantly scraping the barrier seems a tad problematic.

[DenBommer]

On the other hand, there’s probably also a reason why they have stuck with the piston engine all these years.

[gruntguru]

As with most of his videos there is lots of technically incorrect stuff (lever arms and torque for example) and lots of technical drawbacks ignored (sealing, combustion chamber surface area).

High surface area to volume ratio is a major negative to combustion efficiency.