Current F1 Power Supply Units

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by knighty

but on the other side of the coin, my personal experience of dealing with Japanese Engineers is not great, they are refusing to recruit any external experts and they will only listen to a Yoda type character within the company.

It would seem that there are a number of competing factions inside Honda R&D.
On line Scuttlebutt is that there are two versions of the PU at Barcelona and that the unit being used this week (according to Jensen) is not the one to be used in Melbourne. The second unit has been allegedly developed by a "rogue team" inside R&D rather than the F1 team.
Japanese management doesn't seem to be able to get away from the structured, detail programmed and planned culture and able to adopt a flexible attitude to new ideas and opportunities.
F1 doesn't suit that management style.
Meanwhile at least they seem to be running reliably and a wee bit more competitive than last year.
Ron Dennis wouldn't be the easiest task master but I doubt the blame can be laid at his door.

[chillibowl]

i dont know. competing factions/a 'rogue' team working on the same problem doesnt sound like a rigid structure at all.

[Richard C]

Having an internal competition sounds quite healthy (Honda PSU development). There are examples of this type of thing working well in other industries. There is a classic one in the IT world from decades ago, but I just can't remember who it was.

Richard

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Sounds like a big step towards another spec. series to me.
Do we need another one of them?

Until the early-eighties, Formula One used to allow customer cars.

[chillibowl]

so i watched the last race at the pub so no sound...did the exhaust changes lead to a noticeable difference/improvement in the sound of the engines in OZ?

[wnut]

This is a really interesting development in F1 engine technology:

"Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) combines diesel-like compression ignition within a petrol-fired engine. But the latest F1 engines have not forsaken spark plugs. Rather they use a combination of compression (spontaneous) ignition with conventional spark-fired ignition, depending upon operating loads."



http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

[Casper]

From what I can gather it is treading the same path as Mazda is doing with their Sky Active system. Mazda's piston design uses a chamber on top of the piston and very high compression ratios as F1 seems to do. If my presumption is valid then it seems Mazda trumped F1 by some years in developing a motor that parallels the thinking behind the technology. Mazda (internally) have recently said they have no interest in Hybrid or electric propulsion which seems to indicate they must be pushing ahead with furthering the idea.

[knighty]

For sure this is an interesting revelation, but as with most things its certainly nothing new, they have just re-named an old idea for a bit of marketing BS......most direct injection engines are whats called a homogeneous charge, which have a sideways /horizontal aimed injector under the intake port, so the incoming gasses mix nicely with the intake charge of air.

this Mahle gizmo is more linked what was previously termed "stratified charge injection" (SCi) which uses a vertically positioned direct injector almost parallel to the spark plug, and they create a very localised charge or air & combustion in the central area of the cylinder for a lean-burn fuel economy strategy, its only of use at low throttle, and I believe it also needs to deactivate one of the two ports to promote more swirl (opposed to tumble) in the combustion chamber.....Mercedes tried it about 15 years ago on a road car project and failed, more recently Ford tried to do it on the 3cyl 1.0L ecoboost "fox" engine, and also failed........its extremely complex on a road car, but probably easier on a race car as the drive cycle and engine mapping conditions is sooooo much simpler and less varied.

To make it work properly you need both the vertical injector for mid-range drivability, then you switch over to the side injector for top-end performance.......for sure its working for Ferrari, but its nothing new.......does make you wonder what Mercedes solution is!

[knighty]

heres a better description with some images

http://www.f1technical.net/news/20316

.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by knighty

heres a better description with some images

http://www.f1technical.net/news/20316

.

Thanks for the link. A few points (some nerdy)...

People like to talk about how F1 has little in the way of road relevancy. While you mention that manufacturers have tried to get this technology to work on road cars, it clearly seems to be attractive to them (just difficult). I can imagine that success in something like F1 might be the first step to solving some of the issues with success in the road car application.

Assuming that diagram is accurate (and I see no reason why it wouldn't be), the pre-chamber housing looks to thread into the head. So it looks like it would be easy to swap out different housings without having to redo the head. I was wondering if from a homologation point of view games could be played and this could be an area for ongoing development (i.e. that housing might not be part of the homologation). But In reality, I suspect the token homologation line item for "combustion" is broad enough to cover the housing because combustion happens within that housing. Maybe all moot in 2017 and beyond if the token system is ditched or redone.

Richard

[knighty]

yes, this is actually an instance where F1 will advance a technology for road car use, and put a good-technology in the spot-light without a doubt........basically the age-old problem is gasoline burns far too slow, and it keeps burning by the time it goes down the exhaust port which is just wasted energy, this is not a problem for diesels.

This is the holy grail of gasoline tuning, whereby Mahle are managing to create about 10 little spark plugs via the small gas ports and set off a massive instantaneous flame-front and burn all the fuel-air mix instantaneously and much quicker, and before the exhaust valve opens, hence the graphs on the patent application show a significantly reduced exhaust temperature......it will benefit both fuel economy and CO2 reductions, and if they can prove a reduction on the NEDC or new "real world" drive cycle, this will be a licence to print money for Mahle and be a win-win for everyone.

I'm now reading Mercedes have been using it all along, makes sense, German tier-1 supplier (Mahle) gives its best technology firist to their biggest customer - Damiler......AKA: Mercedes.......then gives it to Ferrari, Honda & Renault only after Mercedes have demolished everyone........you can bet that Mercedes paid big dollar for exclusivity, or more likely signed off a ton of mass-production deals with Mahle.

Oh, yes, you can bet your house that the F1 engine builders could easily tweek the 10 gas ports that create the flame front and it will easily make a significant performance gain, and they wont have to use development tokens, as it will be far too hard for the FIA to spot.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by knighty

heres a better description with some images

http://www.f1technical.net/news/20316

.

Thanks Knight, really interesting article.

Most of the gain seems to be as a result of being able to ignite a leaner charge in the main combustion chamber, this would not be possible with an ignition spark, but is possible with a flame front.

I take it there is less heat generated because there is not still a flame front exiting through the exhaust ports? Leaner burning would normally be hotter even without detonation.
As far as getting a more even mix in the charge the bulk of the combustion mix could just be injected prior to the turbo, would cool the compressed air and increase the burn efficiency.

In light of the above relevant technology developments, can we now dump the KERS and battery dead end?

[Casper]

If they were really serious about fuel and mechanical efficiency they would dump the camshaft and associated drives etc that control it and then watch the efficiency go through the roof. I thought this was supposed to be about F1 leading the world in technology when in fact they are trailing in ICE design in at least one major respect.

[GasperG]

There is one problem with MAHLE Jet Ignition, it uses DI and PFI, that is not allowed under current regulations:

There may only be one direct injector per cylinder and no injectors are permitted upstream of the intake valves or downstream of the exhaust valves.

How do they do it if they are doing it this way? Or is it something completely different?

Can it be that main combustion chamber is also filled (98%) from DI in the intake cycle?

[knighty]

We'll yes the patent images show pfi, but the sectioned CAD image from mahle shows homogeneous DI with a horizontal DI injector located under the intake port.....a couple of advanced road cars now have both fitted, the AER MAZDA have been fitting both to their I4 2.0l for many years as it benefits both drivability and economy.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by knighty

We'll yes the patent images show pfi, but the sectioned CAD image from mahle shows homogeneous DI with a horizontal DI injector located under the intake port.....a couple of advanced road cars now have both fitted, the AER MAZDA have been fitting both to their I4 2.0l for many years as it benefits both drivability and economy.

I suspect the point he is bringing up is not the port injection (prior to the intake valve), but the fact that there is two DFI injectors while the rules say there can be only one? Could the two injector solution be the ideal one (road cars), but maybe they have some tricky injector flow paths and nozzles that allow a single injector (high pressure valve) to serve both functions on the F1 engines? I guess it depends upon how you define "single injector".

Richard

[Casper]

I believe that a camless ICE is the way forward if the ICE is to be used as it currently is. The forecast introduction of 48V electrical systems in 2018 (Nissan) to production cars will enable a camless motor to be more easily controlled as the 12V system has been a bit of a stumbling block. It will allow the timing on all cylinders or any individual cylinder to be varied to the exact conditions of the moment and not limited by mechanical parameters as it is now. The motor already exists in at least one place if not two as BMW were rumored some years ago to have done it with the limitation of the electrical system being a problem.

Some reading....

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sour...e%20introduced


https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sour...amless%20motor

Koenigsegg my be a small player but they are are not insignificant in this technology and it will be interesting to see where it goes and if it is allowed to enter motor sport, but mostly if it lives up to the hype as it seems to have done so far.

[knighty]

camless....forget it......I actually work for a Tier-1 automotove technology supplier that came very close to putting camless into mass production a few years ago, I have been working on 48V micro-hybrid technologies for the past 8 years, we hold a lot of IP on the camless subject, but it never happened, as it was a very costly technical mess, which only gives a marginal/small gain on a road car engine.......yes on a very high revving race engine it will be useful, but the solenoid and power electronics requirement will be huge, also the packaging problem is significant to say the least.......

I can really see TJI being industrialized very quicky fo road car use, as this will allow BIG cost-saves on the after-treatent system, whereby NOX traps and catalysts will be quite reduced or possiby redundant, as the combustion process will burn off the majority of nasties, they cost several hundred Euros each, so TJI would be a very simple business case, possible like for like.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by knighty

camless....forget it......I actually work for a Tier-1 automotove technology supplier that came very close to putting camless into mass production a few years ago, I have been working on 48V micro-hybrid technologies for the past 8 years, we hold a lot of IP on the camless subject, but it never happened, as it was a very costly technical mess, which only gives a marginal/small gain on a road car engine.......yes on a very high revving race engine it will be useful, but the solenoid and power electronics requirement will be huge, also the packaging problem is significant to say the least.......

I can really see TJI being industrialized very quicky fo road car use, as this will allow BIG cost-saves on the after-treatent system, whereby NOX traps and catalysts will be quite reduced or possiby redundant, as the combustion process will burn off the majority of nasties, they cost several hundred Euros each, so TJI would be a very simple business case, possible like for like.

So in your opinion Koenigsegg is wasting their time even when 48V is introduced? It seems fairly serious to me as a casual observer.

[knighty]

All 48V does is reduces the currents to around about 100 to 150Amps.....in return there is a small efficiency gain, but overall the main reason for going 48V is the currents are not in the region of 300-400Amps for a 12V system.......so its more cost effective and sensible on the electronics front.......48V might help camless, but the reality of the situation is the hydraulically adjustable cam-timing from INA-Schaffler is now widely accepted as a good compromise if your looking for a highy adjustable cam timing system, therefore you avoid the pain and cost of the power electronic and software development, which trust me would be significant.......the road car market is driven by emissions requirements and the reality is cam-timing is only a small contributor, sure its a contributor, but its not a biggy.........combustion efficiency and after-treatment systems are where its all at........anything associated with those two factors are now being chased by the OEM's.........there is a ton of life left in the good old internal combustion engine!

[Casper]

In news just to hand the Chinese are going to have a stab at it.

http://www.enginelabs.com/news/new-e...-technologies/

[knighty]

have you seen who the CEO is of FreeValve?

http://www.freevalve.com/board-of-directors/

its a small world!......certainly a credible technology, the trouble is, in the eyes of the OEM's this FreeValve company is effectively a garden shed, the OEM's only want to deal with the usual tier-1's hence they will need to sell out to the likes of Bosch, FederalMogul, TRW, Siemens, Visteon, UniPart etc.........this is what we did in 2011, and we now go into mass production this year with a very big and well known OEM as an industry first for micro-hybrid technology, otherwise it just was not possible as we spent 2008-2011 trying to convince the OEM's, the engineers were more than interetsed, but the purchasing community saw the risks and walked, basically they ask them selves the following question: "could we sue this company for multi-million euro/dollar damages in 6 years time when its gone all wrong"......no......goodbye.

[Richard C]

knightly, Thanks for your recent posts. Very insightful. I particularly like the point about indemnification and large manufactures being hesitant to partner with small suppliers on high concept, high risk technologies.

Another point about camless engines and the viewpoint from the large manufactures. Generally speaking someone is going to have to do it first, show that it is reliable, cost effective, provides a value to the customers and is demanded by customers (a lot of room for failure). And then... they might jump in. And as you say, they would likely look to the big players (Bosch, etc.) for solutions that they can then plug into their designs.

Richard

[fredd1]

Yes. There's been some interesting info revealed along the way.

[GasperG]

Originally Posted by knighty

All 48V does is reduces the currents to around about 100 to 150Amps.....in return there is a small efficiency gain, but overall the main reason for going 48V is the currents are not in the region of 300-400Amps for a 12V system.......so its more cost effective and sensible on the electronics front.......48V might help camless, but the reality of the situation is the hydraulically adjustable cam-timing from INA-Schaffler is now widely accepted as a good compromise if your looking for a highy adjustable cam timing system, therefore you avoid the pain and cost of the power electronic and software development, which trust me would be significant.......the road car market is driven by emissions requirements and the reality is cam-timing is only a small contributor, sure its a contributor, but its not a biggy.........combustion efficiency and after-treatment systems are where its all at........anything associated with those two factors are now being chased by the OEM's.........there is a ton of life left in the good old internal combustion engine!

I personally don't believe that 48V systems can compete against full hybrids, the end price difference is just to low. Maybe the end price of a car masks away the actual production costs, but I don't understand how Toyota can be pushing their full hybrids to >1.4 million per year if the profit margin is really lower than convectional drive train?

I see 48V system in lower end market (cheap NA engine, manual transmission), because when you start adding options (x-speed dual clutch transmission, turbo DI engine, not to mention diesel) you find your self in the price region of full hybrid. The other market for 48V systems could be pickup trucks, where full hybrids (would) cost considerably more if you wan't to achieve competitive towing capacity.

I know it's off topic but it's an interesting topic