New Engine Formula Rationale - By Flood1

In December (9th or 10th) the FIA will promulgate the 2013 engine regulations. There have been many ideas tossed about in the media about the exact configuration and specification of the Power-Train regulations, but some things are clear: their intent is certain. In September, I wrote this:

The engine will likely be a twin turbocharged 1.6L 4 cylinder with Kers. The turbo boost is expected to be around 3 bar in order to reach a BHP of 500 to 550.  RPM's will be limited to approximately 10,000 to 11,000. The Kers output is expected to be 112kw (150 HP) and the battery storage is expected to increase to 2200 kJ. Quite frankly, I find those storage capacities to be a bit hard to believe.  I doubt that the current batteries have that kind of capacity. If true, Kers would supply 150BHP for 24 seconds. If so, the car would have a maximum combined power of around 650 to 700 BHP.

The original blog is here.

   

Framework for Power-Train RegulationsThe executive summary of the framework document includes two points that explain the principal reasons for changing the engine regulations:

1. The need to create a healthier commercial outlook for the participants by lowering the cost. This will be done by encouraging research and development for F1 drive-trains that are relevant to road cars, and by reducing waste by increasing the longevity requirements of the components.

2. The need to react to public concern about the environment. This will be achieved by the development of energy-efficient engines, the use of regenerative power, the use of thermal power recovery systems, and the increasing use of biofuels.

Their intent is to reduce fuel consumption by 30% (of the 2010 levels). There is some discussion of increasing this by 2.5% in each of the four years that the regulations are in effect. If so, by 2016 the fuel use will have been reduced by 37.5%. The idea is that this would parallel improvements in road car technologies.To achieve the goal of 30% reduction they plan to do the following:

1. Reduce the size of the engine (20%)

2. Improve the efficiency (10%)

The power and speed lost to the engine reduction measures is to be replaced by two “green” technologies:

1. Kinetic Energy Recovery System – The KERS system recovers the energy of momentum. Generators on the cars are connected to the drive-train. They are engaged when the car is under deceleration. The at-rest inertia of the generators, and the energy needed to turn them, slows the cars and aids the braking. The generators store energy in batteries and super capacitors to be used to provide additional horsepower.

2. Thermal Power Recover – The intent is to use turbo compounding to add horsepower. The turbos use exhaust gasses to spin a compressor. The compressor compounds the fuel and makes it burn more efficiently. This provides more BTUs per volume. The exhaust gasses are wasted energy, so their use to improve efficiency is a no-brainer.The reduction in fuel use will reduce the pollution associated with the current engines.

Another move in this direction is to use an increasing percentage of biofuels. The fuel will be road car pump fuel with a biofuels component of 10%. There is discussion of increasing this percentage progressively over the four year period in line with road car developments. They are also considering the use of 100% biofuels.

Noise – The noise produced by the cars will be greatly reduced by the new regulations, perhaps as much as 40%. The engines will be much smaller. They will also be limited to about 11,000 RPMs (currently 18,000). The exact size and configuration has not been released, but suggestions have ranged from 1.4 liter 4 cylinder to 2.2 liter 6 cylinder. The turbos will also reduce the engine noise as they are on the exhaust system outlets.

It is unclear what the manufacturers want to do. Talks have been ongoing, but little has leaked out. My best guess is here.

 

Comments

[Greg]

The need to stay relevant is paramount. Personally I would prefer a blown V-8 (actually a return to the V-10's as a compromise between the V-8's and V-12's), but those days seem to have passed.

They key will be the chassis not the drive train. You can have the most efficient drive train available, but if the drivers cannot pass because of air turbulence, the F1 show will continue to struggle with the average fan. They have to come up with a way to cut through the turbulence when needed.

[sportsman]

These proposals make perfect sense to me.F1 can and must react to global concerns regarding enviromental issues and the current changes in the market place.High fuel effeciency small turbo's with good peformance and meeting ever more stringent emission controls are the future.
Although the global economic crisis and lack of results lead to the exit of Toyota BMW and Honda from F1 they are actively pursuing a hybrid road car market and marketing themselves as enviromentally friendly manufacturers.Their participation in F1 actually produced negative publicity
in the showrooms.

[flood1]

Greg, if you look at the links that I included to the September blog you would see what I think will be the new aero rules: much smaller wings and a curved bottom to produce ground effects. Not those of the '80s with skirts and such, but more like the last Champ Car, the Panoz DP-01.

I think that is the way to go on the chassis regulations.

[CFster]

Oh great, they'll be 40% quieter.

I'm running out of reasons to see F1 live again.

[Truck Lowering Suspension Parts]

The first priority is always the public. Brilliant, I concur.

[Engine and Transmission World Transmissions]

Its respectable to scan whatever aggregation most this now. Its significant and somehow distribution this to readers similar me, makes me poverty to shift the web to be fit to get much wonderful ideas.