jono794 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
The end of your 2nd sentence is the nail on the head, it's more efficient to do it that way hence the lower revs. I guess what they are really proposing is moving that efficiency vs performance curve up the scale to the point where you get the best bang for your buck(revs).
Currently the rules say you get maximum fuel flow rate at 10,500rpm - 15,000rpm.
What they probably will do is increase the max fuel rate to 25% higher, but make that only available from 15,000rpm.
It's a huge joke, it will make the engines less powerful than they could be if it was allowed from 10,500rpm, and continue to perpetuate the myth that the fuel flow rate was responsible for lower engine rpms.
People don't seem to understand that if there were no regulations limiting engine design we'd have engines running much slower than right now.Can you explain your reasoning behind this? Not the case as far as I'm aware.
Thanks! I need clarification also! I had some trouble understanding his previous post btw..
As far as I understand, and I am no engine guru here. Fuel rate does not limit RPM, A/F Ratio might, so if at 12K RPM you are maxing out your fuel flow for a given CFM's (Boost), then one would think that the only way to get above that 12K RPM ceiling, is to reduce the amount of boost to keep control of the A/F ratio and temperatures in case you start leaning out. The engine will still produce power, but it will produce less. Engineers might think that it is not worth the risk to push for more RPM's when the advantage given by running more RPM's is negated by a loss of power as a result of boost reduction due to fuel starvation. Introduce fancy fuels and oils here to help a bit!
If you look at the HP/Tq formula HP=RPM*T/5252, a engine running at 12,000RPM producing 400Tq will give you about 900Hp, if Tq remains the same, usually peak Tq occurs at peak engine V.E. (Volumetric Efficiency), the same engine running at 15000RPM producing 350Tq will give about 1000Hp. So with an increase of 3000K RPM our make believe engine lost 50Tq but gained 100Hp. F1 engines are designed for good VE at high RPMs, so your Tq curve will be somewhat flat, in which case your main driver of power is RPM, more RPM = More Power for more time = faster lap times. Turbos help in keeping that Tq curve flat. So by allowing more fuel, you increase the RPM range where you can still produce power, if more fuel will allow the engine to stay flat on the Tq curve at 15000 RPM and still produce 400Tq we are in the range of 1142Hp!!!! How can that be bad for the sport???
If what you say is true, that freedom of design will takes us to lower RPM's, then the only way to produce power will be by producing a lot of Tq down low in your RPM range, and that will be unsustainable by current F1 engine design and it will mean more weight, you will have to engineer an engine that will have is peak VE down low, with a long stroke to help turn your crank shaft, long stroke means high piston speeds which limits peak RPM, basically we are talking about Chevrolet LS1 engine philosophy. You will have to run a very low final gear or a transmission with 15 gears to keep the engine on the sweet spot.
Then new engine proposed for 2021 will loose the MGUK, in my opinion this is the way to go, again I might be completely wrong or missing something but you will have to better explain your reasoning because I am lost.