[Tech Issue] The probable future of F1 engines

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Finding suitable transmissions to cope with ever increasing power and torque outputs are really the only thing that hold back a lot more performance from road going diesels.

Very true Marbot. And probably freeing up the regs for F1 as far as transmissions, particularly CVT, and in electronic control of both transmission and supercharging rather than in basic engine format could be the way to go.

The problem with developing advanced gasoline engines is the medium to long term availability of gasoline. Diesel offers more opportunity for development of bio substitutes, and various forms of hydrocarbon gas in compressed and liquified form would seem to have longer span reserves than oil based gasoline.

By the way MotoGp goes 1000cc, 4cyl in 2012. Another home for the Global engine?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Very true Marbot. And probably freeing up the regs for F1 as far as transmissions, particularly CVT, and in electronic control of both transmission and supercharging rather than in basic engine format could be the way to go.

In a statement yesterday, Montezemolo said: "Carbon brakes, for instance, are impossible to use with road cars and we can accept a standard gearbox without losing F1 characteristics."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80687

Originally Posted by Oldtony

By the way MotoGp goes 1000cc, 4cyl in 2012. Another home for the Global engine?

Moto2 (replaces outgoing 250 class) will use a standard Honda engine with chassis made by each team for next season. It was also thought that the 1000cc engine for MotoGP was more in keeping with road bike thinking.

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by knighty

no surprises there!.....this is why down-sizing is starting to be uncovered as fools gold......it costs a bloody fortune to tool up a new down-sized engine, and you need to rev the nuts out of it to get it to perform.......small engine capacity does not equal les fuel consumed.......the fuel economy save is principally achieved by down-speeding an existing engine architecture......this is the car you should have driven, this is the future........read on!

http://www.newspress.co.uk/DAILY_LIN...9/57582cpt.htm

this is why I believe that F1 will evolve what they already have

I read the link and it certainly seems to be a step forward.What wasn't apparent was the level of thermal efficiency being achieved.If you take a look at http://people.bath.ac.uk/ccsshb/12cyl ,and most people with an interest in engines probably have,they mention 50% thermal efficiency.While part of this is obviously attributable to the benefits of scale it ought to provide a target.The difference for road engines will be to extract more power while ensuring a level of durability that retail customers will accept.Like many others,I have memories of fiddling with camshafts,carburettors and valves in an attempt to extract a bit more performance than the factory intended.I think we all found that more power came at the cost of a shorter engine life.
I think the concept of a global race engine has merit for the categories other than Formula One as it lowers the barriers to entering motorsport.In addition to the reasons given in an earlier post,there are structural considerations.Unless the block is capable of resisting aerodynamic and cornering loads there will be a need to introduce additional bracing between the chassis and the gearbox.This tends to get in the way of the ultimate intake and exhaust systems.How about the first move in the direction of Utopian motorsport being to lop off a pair of cylinders from the current crop of engines?Add some light forced induction and encourage greater efficiency.

[knighty]

Originally Posted by Marbot

So you're trying to get a petrol engine to behave like a diesel engine by utilizing the lower rev range more - "down-speeding" ?
.

thats right - you got it......friction increases at the square of crank speed, hence you slow it down (by about 25% ish) and the fuel economy and efficiency is greatly increased

I think demontezemelo is right on the money with binning carbon brakes and standard gearboxes......the amount of carbon dust emitted from F1 brakes must be horrendous for ones health

this is also the same reason that brush-less electrical motors are also better for a great deal less carbon dust emissions - like none!

I really cant see 2 stroke diesels coming into F1 - like I said - anything too new will cost a bomb to develop

anyways - nice talking - your bimmer sounds like a train, by brother has a 535D with an m pack - bleedin flying carpet!!!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by knighty

thats right - you got it......friction increases at the square of crank speed, hence you slow it down (by about 25% ish) and the fuel economy and efficiency is greatly increased

That was always the problem with conventional petrol engines for road cars. They had power, but in the wrong place, which is why I eventually turned to the 'dark-side'.

Originally Posted by knighty

anyways - nice talking - your bimmer sounds like a train, by brother has a 535D with an m pack - bleedin flying carpet!!!

Strange that you assumed it was a "bimmer".

Mines a 335D Coupe, bought for a song (you would not believe!), and remapped on a rolling road. The all-important mid-range power is astounding and the speedometer now runs out of digits. Ferrari! Who 'needs' a Ferrari?

[old man]

Fascinating discussion, what do you predict they will try on the present engine then knighty?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by old man

Fascinating discussion, what do you predict they will try on the present engine then knighty?

Well, it seems like they'll have to knock the revs down by about 10,000 rpm or more for a start!

[knighty]

Originally Posted by old man

Fascinating discussion, what do you predict they will try on the present engine then knighty?

if they do adopt down-speeding method, I would suspect they reduce the max rpm from the 18,000 current limit......to something like 14-15,000 ish.....then make the low to mid range more drivable in order to compensate, and re-jig the gear-box ratios........this could principally be achieved by adopting a variable valve timing system, like the traditional units currently in mass production, or something like multiair from the INA schaffler group which fiat and alfa are currently embracing in mass production.......fiat-ferrari-FIA......dont rule it out!...... which is literally fully controllable and deletes the intake cam......but I'm not sure if multi-air could operate at such high RPM......perhaps they could prove it out in F1!!!

but then again they could do something completley different.......we are all speculating at the end of the day!!

[ss_collins]

but I think you are referring to the article between Ian Bamsey and Dave Mountain regarding the MT1 engine

Nah not that one - tough we did use an MT1 block for illustration - this one is with somewhat bigger names!

[old man]

Thanks knighty, I just wish I fully understood your answer which simply goes to show how out of touch with modern engine technology an old guy can get!

[knighty]

Originally Posted by old man

Thanks knighty, I just wish I fully understood your answer which simply goes to show how out of touch with modern engine technology an old guy can get!

hey old man - no worries - dont get sucked into the technical detail from engine junkies like me......its all quite simple at the end of the day .......once broken down into bite size chunks.....ref your pm:

by far the best book to read is this one in the link below, its both a theoretical and practical guide based on his wealth of experience.......I still sometimes refer to it myself!.......I'm sure others will chip in with other reccomendations, but I have found this book to be a good all rounder........he has also written several other engine tuning books which I also think are excellent - particularly the 2-stroke one

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Four-stroke-.../dp/1859604358

enjoy!

[knighty]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

Nah not that one - tough we did use an MT1 block for illustration - this one is with somewhat bigger names!

Hi Sam - I'm intreagued!......what did said bigger names have to say on the subject?......were they actually being constructive or just on a sales pitch flog a dead horse or pimping their design, manufacturing and support services???.......a link would be handy.....as after I bought the mag to read about the global race engine article, I very nearly asked for a refund as it was just dire to be honest.

that MT1 engine is now 9 years old and has never run.......I have learnt a great deal more since we designed that engine and I must say I dont think the standard ford duratec cylinder head and head gasket would have lasted very long at all when pushing 500+bhp and 600+nm in an endurance LMP car......hey ho - you live and learn

[ss_collins]

Can post it yet as I'm not in the office - but I'll update it and post it in the next couple of weeks

[old man]

Thanks Knighty, book ordered but puzzled about author, I thought he specialised in communication technology!

[knighty]

I forgot to mention.....I also think its only a matter of time before direct injection becomes standard fitment in F1......to my knowledge they are still all port-fuel injected......much like when Aston and corvette changed over to DI in GT1, I think power levels will remain about the same, but fuel economy will increase by about 5%.

there is also the bonus that both VVC and DI will make a huge reduction to the amount of unburnt fuel that gets exhausted from an F1 engine resulting in a huge emissions decrease.......both would be relativley easy technologies to adopt with only mild revisoons to the pistons, cylinderhead and general mapping

anyway.....thats enough speculation for today

[duke_toaster]

Provided it doesn't cost stupid amounts of money for teams buying customer engines, I think DI and VVT are good ideas for when the next generation of engines are brought in (as I said before, 2000cc turbos are my preferred option).

[ss_collins]

DI makes perfect sense but with the regulations as they are nobody can build a new engine.

[duke_toaster]

They can, but the FIA would have to approve it first.

Originally Posted by 2010 Sporting Regulations

1. A homologated engine is an engine identical in every respect to either :
(i) An engine delivered to the FIA no later than 31 March 2008*.
Other than the specific exceptions below, any such engine must include all the parts described in Article 5.4.4 of the 2009 F1 Technical Regulations and be identical to one which completed two race Events during the 2007 Championship season.
<snip>
(iii) An engine delivered to the FIA after 31 March 2008, or modified and re-delivered to the FIA after 31 March 2008, which the FIA is satisfied, in its absolute discretion and after full consultation with all other suppliers of engines for the Championship, could fairly and equitably be allowed to compete with other homologated engines.
All such engines should be delivered in such a condition that the seals required under Article 28.4 can be fitted. Engines will be held by the FIA throughout the homologation period.

[Marbot]

Surely DI is already out there on the roads doing it stuff. GDI, FSI, IDE etc? It doesn't seem to be making that much of a difference on current cars. Room for improvement or another dead end?

Drove a 1.6 turbo Astra (new one) today. 180bhp, and 240Nm of torque from 2,000rpm to right passed 5,500rpm. Very good...for a 1.6, and 40+ mpg too!

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

They can, but the FIA would have to approve it first.

And hence they practically can't. The legislator aimed at a total 'freeze' on engine development.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

And hence they practically can't. The legislator aimed at a total 'freeze' on engine development.

Yes, but Max Mosley is no longer in charge.

[Sodemo]

I wouldn't mind seeing a turbo charged V6 or even a V5 (if Volvo want to enter!).

In fact, I would like to see 4, 5, 6 cylinder options, with varying rev limits;

4-cylinder - 2000cc - 12,000 rpm limit
5-cylinder - 2000cc - 11,000 rpm limit
6-cylinder - 2000cc - 10,000 rpm limit

[duke_toaster]

I was thinking of something like that myself, with different rev limits per number of cylinders (also 2000cc turbo) but all with the same pressure limits. Not being an engine builder I wouldn't want to speculate on numbers. Different rev limits are used in the WTCC for example - 8500rpm for 4-pots, 8750rpm for five cylinders, 9000rpm for six.

[knighty]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

DI makes perfect sense but with the regulations as they are nobody can build a new engine.

thats the whole point of the discussion......Jean Todt has appointed an ex Ferrari engine man (Gilles Simon) to the FIA in order to evaluate new green/eco technologies......I guess its all a case of how far they want to take it before they regulate whats allowable and whats not......allowing for the spectacle and noise to continue of course!

[SennaTheGreat]

Crazy question, lets say that JT allows Diesel engine's, could we see Audi come into F1?