The first 2014 turbo engine breaks cover

[MJones94]

http://www.racer.com/mercedes-reveal...rticle/275729/

"There will be a new quality to the racing, too. It will edge toward a thinking drivers' formula to get the most from the car and the available fuel energy.

"The engines will also deliver much more torque – especially on the exit of the corners. Cars with more power than grip coming out of the corners – that is something that we all enjoy. "They will also put F1 back at the cutting edge of new technology, which is what the fans want."

-Andy Cowell, MD of MBHPE.

Note the typing error, which claims the engines will rev to 125,000rpm!

Credit to Racer magazine's website for the article.

[Marbot]

Indeed. Autosport also have an article worth reading.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/105081

Sounds promising.

And yes, the turbo engines will have much more torque than the outgoing V8s.

[Flavio Galtieri]

No, it's not a typo, it's the turbo running at 125,000rpm!!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by MJones94

Note the typing error, which claims the engines will rev to 125,000rpm!

It actually says that the turbocharger will be spinning at that speed.

[MJones94]

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

No, it's not a typo, it's the turbo running at 125,000rpm!!

Woops, I did not read it properly . That feat of engineering really is incredible!

The large increase in torque should in theory create better racing, what with the cars potentially sliding about a bit more, or at least until the teams get on top of the problem!

[Marbot]

Perhaps the most significant thing about the new engines.


Cowell said: "Today it is difficult to be quick without KERS - for 2014 it will be impossible to go racing without ERS."

[MJones94]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Perhaps the most significant thing about the new engines.


Cowell said: "Today it is difficult to be quick without KERS - for 2014 it will be impossible to go racing without ERS."

A KERS failure in 2014 during a race would pretty much end someone's race then. I imagine a lot of the teams are working on the reliability of the system to make sure that it does not happen to them.

Does Marussia have KERS now?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by MJones94

Does Marussia have KERS now?

Marussia will have KERS for this season. They will also be the only team using Cosworth engines.

[ss_collins]

Not the first by any stretch - Renault revealed its engine in October last year!

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/n...014-f1-engine/

I think rendering from merc is quite heavy on styling rather than real metal bits but thats what you would expect at this stage!

[IndyDonut]

Solid-state battery research will be pretty frantic leading up to the 2014 season. The technology is apparently on the verge of being ready for consumer products, so I'm guessing the manufacturers will be going all in on research there. Benefits include: much lighter, much more stable, film-like substance rather than a liquid, much higher energy capacity. So basically, literally everything an F1 engine builder would want in their 2014 engine. Whoever gets them first (assuming the FIA doesn't ban them because they're imbeciles) will save a few kilograms to use for ballast. Except...the FIA mandates a minimum center of gravity for engines anyways, right? Sigh.

[MJones94]

Originally Posted by IndyDonut

Solid-state battery research will be pretty frantic leading up to the 2014 season. The technology is apparently on the verge of being ready for consumer products, so I'm guessing the manufacturers will be going all in on research there. Benefits include: much lighter, much more stable, film-like substance rather than a liquid, much higher energy capacity. So basically, literally everything an F1 engine builder would want in their 2014 engine. Whoever gets them first (assuming the FIA doesn't ban them because they're imbeciles) will save a few kilograms to use for ballast. Except...the FIA mandates a minimum center of gravity for engines anyways, right? Sigh.

Is a solid state battery the same as a Lithium Ion battery? Porsche have started putting LI batteries in their GT2 RS.

[IndyDonut]

Originally Posted by MJones94

Is a solid state battery the same as a Lithium Ion battery? Porsche have started putting LI batteries in their GT2 RS.

Solid-state does not mean lithium-ion. Solid-state refers to the physical characteristics of the battery, as in it is an entirely solid material (in this case, similar to film). In the case of current developments, lithium is still used to hold charge, but the end result of using other compounds with it leads to a lighter, more stable battery. Lithium-[insert whatever compound used by different companies developing] solid-state batteries would be much better than current lithium-ion battery technology. Lithium-air solid-state will be big by the end of this decade.

EDIT: http://phys.org/news/2012-09-toyota-...uperionic.html
Anybody know what kind of batteries Toyota is using for their LeMans program? Their SS batteries not due till 2015, but I'd guess an F1 or LM program would get them earlier, with prototypes already running.

[Oldtony]

Why did FIA ban capacitors as energy storage in F1. Certainly they are most efficient in storing energy over a relatively short time, and need to store at high voltage, but it would appear Mazda at least have been able to use it in road going KERS application.
By the way it should be stressed that we are now talking about ERS not KERS.
KERS is limited to recycling kinetic energy instead of wasting it to heat in braking.
ERS allows recycling of energy from any waste source, engine temp. exhaust gas pressure etc.as well as kinetic. A much wider opportunity.
I'm still not clear on the output use of the ERS. Is it only measured when output is to drive wheels, or is it always counted as ERS use for whatever it is used?
For instance is ERS used to spin up turbochargers to avoid lag, or used to drive accessories like pumps and alternators counted in the ERS allowance.
Anyone delved into the minutae of the FIA specs enough to answer?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by IndyDonut

Except...the FIA mandates a minimum center of gravity for engines anyways, right? Sigh.

Not centre of gravity, but there is a minimum height for the crankshaft to be above the reference plane.

There was a time when certain car manufacturers were spending untold sums of money on competing with each other to see how low in the crankcase they could get a crankshaft in an F1 engine, and therefore a lower centre of gravity. It's hard to know what benefit this would have for the majority of road cars.

We are now told that Honda are laying off 1300 workers from their car plant in Swindon, UK....hmmmm.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Anyone delved into the minutae of the FIA specs enough to answer?

You will be allowed to deploy ERS to deliver 161 bhp for 33.3 seconds per lap. How you would do that must be within the regulations i.e. 125,000rpm limit on the turbo, etc. It is thought that, initially, there may be some difficulty in attaining those figures reliably over a race distance.

I'm not sure if this is relevant or not, but I've been using Lithium-Polymer batteries in my RC Helicopters and Planes for some time now. They are far better than the very 'yesterday' Lithium-Ion batteries that I once used. But they are also a little bit more...unstable.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Marbot

You will be allowed to deploy ERS to deliver 161 bhp for 33.3 seconds per lap. How you would do that must be within the regulations i.e. 125,000rpm limit on the turbo, etc.

Understood Marbot, but is that the limit that may be delivered to the drive train, or is any amount generated above that limit available for spinning turbos or driving accessories.
There are plenty of instances of lithium batteries in Lap tops etc. causing fires.

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

No, it's not a typo, it's the turbo running at 125,000rpm!!

Er, don't put your hand in there, son.....

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It actually says that the turbocharger will be spinning at that speed.

I was about to post that not even the turbo would reach that speed, shows what I know

Impressive though.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by fourWheelDrift

I was about to post that not even the turbo would reach that speed, shows what I know

Impressive though.

There are plenty of 'every day' turbos that run at even higher RPM rates.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by phoenix

There are plenty of 'every day' turbos that run at even higher RPM rates.

Yep!

I was gonna say, a turbo spinning at 125,000rpm isn't that special, haha.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Understood Marbot, but is that the limit that may be delivered to the drive train, or is any amount generated above that limit available for spinning turbos or driving accessories.

I'm not sure about that, but if you can run the turbo up whilst delivering the maximum allowable bhp in the allotted time, then 'good for you' is my opinion on that.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Matt

Yep!

I was gonna say, a turbo spinning at 125,000rpm isn't that special, haha.

It sounds special to me...

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

It sounds special to me...

It was to amuse people like you that the number was mentioned in the article

Austin Montego Turbo with the turbine running at 153,700 rpm doesn't have the same ring about it.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Marbot

I'm not sure about that, but if you can run the turbo up whilst delivering the maximum allowable bhp in the allotted time, then 'good for you' is my opinion on that.

As I see it the use would be to transfer energy while under braking to spin up the turbo so that maximum pressure would be available as soon as the driver went back on to the throttle.
Without things like variable appertures (which appear to be banned) the lack of exhaust pressure at that time to drive the turbo creates turbo lag. Currently running fuel through the exhaust system as a sort of afterburner gives the same effect, but of course under the new regs. fuel (rightly) becomes a scarce commodity.
That, and driving pumps and alternators is the use of recovered energy that I am querying as counting, or not counting in the ER totals.
Not rocket science, but working it within the rules could be the problem

[Marbot]

I would hope that even the 2014 regulations allow some slack with regard to what you can do besides delivering the maximum power permitted to the wheels in the allotted time.

Having looked through the technical regs for the engines for 2014, I can't see anything in there that wouldn't allow you to do what you will within those regulations. They aren't as restrictive as they might at first appear to be.

I think that the quote: "motor will be put back into motor sport" is quite accurate.