F1 with no engine regulations
Discussion
Just a bit of idle daydreaming really.
What would F1 engines this season be like if they didn't have any size/configuration/electric rules and regulations but just a cap of 100 litres of fuel per race?
A lot of the manufacturers with an interest in the current regulations say they think this years engines are a good thing as they point to the future of road car technology. However, is there a better way for F1 engines to limit themselves on the amount of fuel they use over a race distance than what they are doing this year? Would we see the different engine manufacturers doing very different designs? Would they be massively turbocharged and live with the lag? Would they have hybrid systems to reduce lag and improve driveability or to save fuel?
Just interested in what you think the engine manufacturers would do if they were completely unleashed with todays technologies...
What would F1 engines this season be like if they didn't have any size/configuration/electric rules and regulations but just a cap of 100 litres of fuel per race?
A lot of the manufacturers with an interest in the current regulations say they think this years engines are a good thing as they point to the future of road car technology. However, is there a better way for F1 engines to limit themselves on the amount of fuel they use over a race distance than what they are doing this year? Would we see the different engine manufacturers doing very different designs? Would they be massively turbocharged and live with the lag? Would they have hybrid systems to reduce lag and improve driveability or to save fuel?
Just interested in what you think the engine manufacturers would do if they were completely unleashed with todays technologies...
Vocal Minority said:
Small capacity, forced induction and ERS probably! The regulations are the result of manufacturer pressure after all.
Yes, BUT!they would be much smaller and would probably be de-coupled from the drive-train all together
the cars would be electric, with the 'engine' being a generator and a battery between.
if it was me, I would use a small gas turbine made as efficient as possible to generate some 300Kw running continuously with say a ~20Kwh battery system.
I would also have MGU's on the front wheels to harvest braking from all 4 wheels (no disks required) as well as providing 4WD traction out of slow corners.
but that's just me....
Scuffers said:
doing a quick look about at small high efficency turboshaft engines, 100Kg's of fuel to last 1.75 hours get's you just shy of 300Kw if your running Kerosene
That would mean the cars would be dog slow in comparison to the present .300Kw is about 400BHP ,just over half of the 760HP quoted for this years engines, which I would guess are giving
well over 400HP average for the whole lap.
A gas turbine cannot run at a very high pressure ratio(efficiency)at low altitudes because of problems relating to over heating of the blades. This in turn means that the good old piston engine is rather more fuel efficient at sea level because the CR they are able to run at makes them more fuel efficient than a gas turbine.
Basically you would be getting a lot less energy to use to drive the car for the same amount of fuel.
As for converting a turbines output into electricity....even more losses.
Even on the most power hungry tracks, the average power used over a full lap is something 500-525bhp, so with energy recovery - and a turbine designed for F1 use to start with - and given the light weight that would be achieved as reliabilty and MTBF wouldn't be anywhere near as critical, there'd probably be both room and weight to spare for a waste heat generator to be used to boost efficiency too.
Even if you didn't, the size and weight advantages would allow a very low CoG through ballast use and/or very tight packaging.
Even if you didn't, the size and weight advantages would allow a very low CoG through ballast use and/or very tight packaging.
Edited by PhillipM on Wednesday 9th April 23:19
PhillipM said:
Even on the most power hungry tracks, the average power used over a full lap is something 500-525bhp, so with energy recovery, and a turbine designed for F1 use to start with. Given the light weight that would be achieved as reliabilty and MTBF wouldn't be anywhere near as critical, there'd probably be both room and weight to spare for a waste heat generator to be used to boost efficiency too.
Even if you didn't, the size and weight advantages would allow a very low CoG through ballast use and/or very tight packaging.
According to Scuffers, there is only enough TOTAL energy in the fuel to give a continuous 400BHP for the race durationEven if you didn't, the size and weight advantages would allow a very low CoG through ballast use and/or very tight packaging.
so where is the extra 100-125 BHP going to come from?
PhillipM said:
Auntieroll said:
According to Scuffers, there is only enough TOTAL energy in the fuel to give a continuous 400BHP for the race duration
so where is the extra 100-125 BHP going to come from?
Last time I checked, there were corners, and braking zones.so where is the extra 100-125 BHP going to come from?
Auntieroll said:
Scuffers said:
doing a quick look about at small high efficency turboshaft engines, 100Kg's of fuel to last 1.75 hours get's you just shy of 300Kw if your running Kerosene
That would mean the cars would be dog slow in comparison to the present .300Kw is about 400BHP ,just over half of the 760HP quoted for this years engines, which I would guess are giving
well over 400HP average for the whole lap.
A gas turbine cannot run at a very high pressure ratio(efficiency)at low altitudes because of problems relating to over heating of the blades. This in turn means that the good old piston engine is rather more fuel efficient at sea level because the CR they are able to run at makes them more fuel efficient than a gas turbine.
Basically you would be getting a lot less energy to use to drive the car for the same amount of fuel.
As for converting a turbines output into electricity....even more losses.
And stationary turbines can work, look at any gas power station, problem is there are not many small turboshaft enjne designed for static operation.
Still think it's the way to go, just needs some work.
I can't help but think it would be similar to now.
Possibly a smaller lighter engine running more boost and mgu-k on the front wheels as well. More use of supercaps?
Gas turbines would be cool but I'm not sure any manufacturer would support and build one for a team given their limited appeal for a road car.
Possibly a smaller lighter engine running more boost and mgu-k on the front wheels as well. More use of supercaps?
Gas turbines would be cool but I'm not sure any manufacturer would support and build one for a team given their limited appeal for a road car.
PhillipM said:
Even on the most power hungry tracks, the average power used over a full lap is something 500-525bhp, so with energy recovery - and a turbine designed for F1 use to start with - and given the light weight that would be achieved as reliabilty and MTBF wouldn't be anywhere near as critical, there'd probably be both room and weight to spare for a waste heat generator to be used to boost efficiency too.
Even if you didn't, the size and weight advantages would allow a very low CoG through ballast use and/or very tight packaging.
The average power available is only 400BHP/lap though, so there is insufficient energy in the allowable fuel to complete the race at the 500-525 BHP/lap average output level.Even if you didn't, the size and weight advantages would allow a very low CoG through ballast use and/or very tight packaging.
Edited by PhillipM on Wednesday 9th April 23:19
This would mean that you would have to either run the race at a slower,ie 400BHP/lap average speed or run out of fuel roughly 80% through the race. There would not be enough energy available to finish the race at todays speeds let alone recover any.
At sea level gas turbines are not very fuel efficientat all.
The high efficiency examples which power todays airliners have MASSIVE compressor stages to enable the high pressure ratios required for efficient fuel usage at high altitude and rely on the extremely cold air at altitude to operate without running in to overheating problems.
Super capacitors don't have a particularly high energy density either, so the cars would be slow and heavy.
As much as I dislike the present sound of the cars,I must admit that the technology is pretty amazing and will no doubt impact on road vehicle applications in the coming years.
I am old enough to remember the Lotus 56 gas turbine car racing and it was even quieter than this seasons engines, just a thought, perhaps a sound generator could be fitted in the cars playing a Matra V12 soundtrack to make the "music" of the engines more palatable to Bernie,Luka et al!
It might be, but given they're recovering enough for an extra 160bhp from the ERS systems at the moment - albiet probably half that continously - a full blown 4 wheel recovery system without the battery pack limits (you'd use the supercap for the peak discharge, then drop it into the battery, as some teams are currently doing) would see you match the current engines even with the current ERS limits, and the packaging and cooling requirements would let you build far better car in terms of aerodynamics and CoG.
Edited by PhillipM on Thursday 10th April 13:48
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff