2T engines in F1?

[greentrumpet]

Pat Symonds may yet be the saviour of the 2 stroke engine. Great power from small cc, wonderful sound, entertaining power band etc. Stinkwheels have traditionally been a bit dirty, smoky, uneconomical. Lotus came up with a great design a few years ago but there seems to have been little enthusiasm. Symonds idea is very exciting and seems very logical.

[Mike Bell]

For those that have no idea what you’re referring to, a link.....

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/n...ener-formula-e

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

For those that have no idea what you’re referring to, a link.....

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/n...ener-formula-e

Thanks for the link Mike, I fell right into that category!

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Thanks for the link Mike, I fell right into that category!

Sure you’re not alone....

Dreams of a 20k rpm multi-cylinder screamer lubricated by Castrol R!

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

Sure you’re not alone....

Dreams of a 20k rpm multi-cylinder screamer lubricated by Castrol R!

I like the sound of that Mike, in both senses of the word! (But would it have to be synthetic Castrol R?)

[Richard C]

Quotes from the Motorsportmagazine.com article.

I certainly think that the internal combustion engine has a long future and I think it has a future that’s longer than a lot of politicians realise because politicians are hanging everything on electric vehicles.

There’s nothing wrong with electric vehicles but there are reasons why they are not the solution for everyone.

I broadly agree with this.

It might be that the next power unit we produce is the last one we do with liquid hydrocarbons

Agree. But I wonder why this should be something radically new such as a two stroke renewable setup vs. something similar to what we have now. It's my understanding from what I read elsewhere that what he is proposing is a very spec setup. So manufactures (Ferrari, etc.) probably just will not care about this unless this two stroke configuration is inline with their future product direction (which I suspect it is not). I can see these power units being very expensive when you factor it all together.

The new engines are likely to remain hybrids but powered by synthetic fuel, made by combining hydrogen with carbon captured from the air, using surplus green energy.

What is the cost of this? Is there any infrastructure in place to support this?

As well as the cars, this e-fuel could power the planes that carry the cars and equipment to races, making a big dent in the sport’s carbon footprint.

For now, that is a huge pipe dream and should not be used to sell this idea IMHO.

Alternative fuel that is created based upon surplus green energy? I think that may be the long term future of cargo transportation. Convert green (solar, wind, etc.) into high density energy (hydrogen or hydrocarbon) for use in mass haulers such as land, sea and air freight. But what is the state of this today? I know there are efforts to create sustainable (and drop in) replacements for jet aircraft, but I suspect this is a long way off.

If anyone is curious, there is a long running thread on https://www.f1technical.net/ about two stroke engines and the potential for them in F1 (Including recent discussion about this same article)

Richard

[chillibowl]

i find i am also intrigued by the fuel, how they will make it, and whether or not it can also be used in their cargo planes?

i would imagine a lot of work has to be done before this becomes a relaity in the next 5 years no?

from the article:

'Research presented at the conference showed that electric racing cars could be responsible for twice the level of carbon emissions as hybrid racing cars, because of the amount produced when building the batteries.'

also would like top hear more on this. on one hand, what he says about batteries doesn't surprise me at all, but on the other hand, dont hybrid cars also use batteries which i am assuming also present this same problems as the electric car batteries he is talking about?

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

from the article:

'Research presented at the conference showed that electric racing cars could be responsible for twice the level of carbon emissions as hybrid racing cars, because of the amount produced when building the batteries.'

also would like top hear more on this. on one hand, what he says about batteries doesn't surprise me at all, but on the other hand, dont hybrid cars also use batteries which i am assuming also present this same problems as the electric car batteries he is talking about?

At the risk of going OT, hybrid road cars have quite small batteries relative to most pure EVs so that lessens their carbon used for production. Interestingly Mazda stated recently during the preview of their first pure EV that they will only fit a small battery pack in order to get the ‘life’ carbon emissions to match comparable ICE models...... But we digress.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

'Research presented at the conference showed that electric racing cars could be responsible for twice the level of carbon emissions as hybrid racing cars, because of the amount produced when building the batteries.'

also would like top hear more on this. on one hand, what he says about batteries doesn't surprise me at all, but on the other hand, dont hybrid cars also use batteries which i am assuming also present this same problems as the electric car batteries he is talking about?

I recognize the quote above as being key to many arguments about the validity of the "green agenda". I have no knowledge about it's accuracy. I suspect there is truth to what is said. I also suspect it's a case of legacy (old way) of manufacturing being used to build the next thing. So, yeah it's probably dirty. Question is... if we are soon to be flying planes using solar energy (converting solar to hydrocarbon) as way to be "carbon neutral" can't that same logic be used/applied to whatever is used to create batteries? (E.g. Excavating and processing rare elements)

I am trying to not get sucked into green energy debates here.

Richard

[Casper]

I think Pat is having a seniors moment myself.

[grantp]

I thought some F1 engines were already running on a form of petroleum+oil mixture.


Allegedly.

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by Casper

I think Pat is having a seniors moment myself.

TBH it’s a headline designed to attract attention- which it has done!

[E.B]

Originally Posted by grantp

I thought some F1 engines were already running on a form of petroleum+oil mixture.


Allegedly.

[Armco Bender]

And their off.....in a cloud of blue smoke.

[S griffin]

It’s something that wouldn’t really work. Leave it as it is, don’t complicate things further

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It’s something that wouldn’t really work. Leave it as it is, don’t complicate things further

How do you know it wouldn’t really work? And I think the current PU is already pretty complicated, maybe using a 2 stroke ICE would make it simpler!

[chillibowl]

ostensibly though, we have the engine we have now because Merc and Renault were working on them before they were adopted by F1 and pushed the series into accepting it.

granted i dont know who presented this idea at the conference, but i just dont see the manus following a design path that doesnt specifically come from either Merc or Ferrari.

[P38 in workshop]

Until the current generation of F1 engines came along,the most efficient engines in existence were the 2 stroke turbocharged engines fitted to ships-universally diesels.They don't depend on a fuel/oil mix and they actually run on some pretty dreadful fuel.If there isn't much more efficiency to be squeezed from a 4 stroke,it may be politically expedient to take advantage of a concept that is inherently more efficient.


The current F1 engines have compression ratios that would have been thought of a diesel like a few years ago and as I understand it,they use a form of pre-combustion chamber which is also a characteristic of diesels.The direct injection is another diesel feature,so why shouldn't there be a move to adopting a different form of engine and refining it.It would be rather nice to see enormous ships saving a few hundred tons of fuel each trip courtesy of work done on the world's race circuits.Certainly a more useful way to go than having a bunch of unemployed vegans agitating to get racing banned.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

How do you know it wouldn’t really work? And I think the current PU is already pretty complicated, maybe using a 2 stroke ICE would make it simpler!

Not that the article is gospel, but it does say that even with a 2 stroke ICE, there would likely also be a hybrid component to the solution. I fully believe the days of simple F1 engines are long, long, long gone.

Richard

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

And their off.....in a cloud of blue smoke.

Hehe.

An image of a grid of Trabants appeared before my eyes and an addition to the F1 Pilotes book of excuses for first corner incidents related to not being able to see where the corner was as an excuse for arriving locked up on the grass and taking out the entire mid-field ...

Either that or the brakes not working due to oil on the track.

[Mike Bell]

Seems not only F1 mooting 2 stroke PUs- also Moto GP....

https://www.visordown.com/news/racin...engine-formula

[Casper]

I wonder what the real reason for the comment was as I am not convinced it was a serious comment and there was a hidden agenda behind the whole thing. Call me cynical!

Actually the modern 2 stroke outboard motor is a very nice thing but two strokes in modern cars have had their day. Mazda is rumoured to be developing a hybrid using a very small constant speed rotary as a range extender which F1 might like to pick up.

One thing a two stroke is not is fuel efficient so he proposes top use a motor type that is not fuel efficient and feed it bio fuel? He lost all credibility for me with his first aero study in F1 all those years ago and basically steered F1 into the aero hole it now finds itself and he is part of the plan for the new car, how does that work?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

I wonder what the real reason for the comment was as I am not convinced it was a serious comment and there was a hidden agenda behind the whole thing. Call me cynical!

I wonder if all of this is attributable to slow news days during the racing off season. The Motorsports Magazine website is down for maintenance as I type this, so I can't go back and try to figure out how that article came to be. The MotoGP one seems to be pure speculation driven by the MM article.

Originally Posted by Casper

Actually the modern 2 stroke outboard motor is a very nice thing but two strokes in modern cars have had their day. Mazda is rumoured to be developing a hybrid using a very small constant speed rotary as a range extender which F1 might like to pick up.

One thing a two stroke is not is fuel efficient so he proposes top use a motor type that is not fuel efficient and feed it bio fuel? He lost all credibility for me with his first aero study in F1 all those years ago and basically steered F1 into the aero hole it now finds itself and he is part of the plan for the new car, how does that work?

If you look over at F1technical.net, there has been a long standing 2 stroke thread and there was speculation that this topic came up due to a research paper about new Opposing Cylinder + Gasoline Compression Ignition configuration that has significantly boosted 2 stroke efficiency. Here is the paper (which is mostly over my head)

http://achatespower.com/wp-content/u...8_API_2017.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoQkTIfAB2U

It sounds like Achates Power has developed this concept (very different from classic 2 stroke designs) and are looking to sell it to someone (currently working with US Dept of Energy on some type of POC or pilot program)

With that being said, who knows if that engine layout is suitable for racing or not. I have no reason to doubt the claims of that paper, but it could be a unique solution for niche scenarios.

Richard

[wolfhound]

I came across an engine that had a similar idea of opposing pistons while at college
but with a different mechanical set up in that used one crankshaft. The pistons drove a rocker that drove conrods connected to the pistons. I cannot remember the inlet outlet arrangement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoQkTIfAB2U

[Mike Bell]

Hopefully not going OT, but opposed piston 2 stroke engines go back a long way. Here’s a couple, admittedly diesel......

Napier Deltic-

https://www.dieselarmy.com/engine-te...-diesel-works/

Commer TS3. It made an unmistakable noise

https://www.enginebuildermag.com/201...t-twelve-dyno/