F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained • Hacker News Board

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#151

Post by thrownaway2424 » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:14 PM UTC

cjrp wrote: post #115

bliti wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there are less gas stations that sell Diesel. Most are located around common routes used by the shipping industry. Also, the requirements for Diesel fuel in the USA is different than in Europe. Plus the price of diesel is actually higher than gasoline. There is another phenomena around diesels in the USA. Which is the perception of the general population towards them. People often think of them as noisy, smelly,…

Ah, I see. I believe there was a time here (England) when diesel was cheaper than petrol, but it's now a few pence/litre more. Presumably that's made up for with improved efficiency though. Funny how the perception of a technology can be tainted by poor implementation. I'm not sure how European diesels were in the past, but as long as I've bothered to pay attention (~10 years), diesel has been more popular here since…

Diesel passenger car engines were pioneered by companies that market cars in Europe but not in America, like Peugeot/Citroën. That's why diesel popularity in Europe is 10-15 years ahead of where it is in America. The early diesel cars from companies that sell in America, like the VW Golf and the Mercedes 300, were just terrible cars.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#152

Post by grecy » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:19 PM UTC

mbell wrote: post #143

bliti wrote: post #52

The interesting bit here is the development of the turbochargers. This is an area that has been slow to change over the years, due to the small amount of turbocharged vehicles available new[1]. Most turbos are used in heavy machinery (garbage trucks, big rigs, etc.), a slowly changing industry. They do not face the same regulations as regular autos. Seems they are doing away with the wastegate and replacing it with a…

> Not to mention it would increase the possibility of the fuel pre-igniting inside the combustion chamber. Detonation isn't all that much of a concern with F1 engines. When running at 15,000-18,000rpm there just isn't enough time for pre-ignition to occur.

Also, the article says they're moving to direct injection, so only gets into the chamber at the instant it's supposed to ignite.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#153

Post by mtr » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:24 PM UTC

TillE wrote: post #129

fduran wrote: post #127

I just want to mention the great safety advances in car (and race) security in the last 20 years; since 1994 and the deaths of Ratzenberger and Senna there has been no driver fatalities in F1 racing. edit "Following Senna's death in 1994, no driver had died from injuries sustained in a World Championship-related accident until María de Villota died in 2013 from complications of injuries she sustained in a testing acc…

It is quite remarkable. For example, the Kubica crash in 2007 looked absolutely horrific, but he walked away with only minor injuries. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=685_1181547684

I was in the stands in the hairpin when I saw Kubica go flying by. Seeing his head bobbing from side to side made me think that he was dead. I managed to capture some pics of the crash and wrote a blog post about it, and other racing accidents.

http://blog.octanenation.com/kubica-accident-pictures-an-aut...

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#154

Post by CWuestefeld » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:27 PM UTC

oliveoil wrote: post #69

Spearchucker wrote: post #61

I stopped watching F1 about 10 years ago, and these new changes just reaffirm that decision. It's no longer about best car + best driver. It's about mixing it up, making it random, to maximise viewer numbers. Not the kind of racing I go for.

Same here, stopped watching around 1998. I though it's mostly about the car (which is largely random per-season, yes) and instead of celebrating the design/engineering behind the only things celebrated around f1 are the personalities of drivers, their excesses and their egos.

the only things celebrated around f1 are the personalities of drivers

I don't think that's quite true. Quite a lot gets said about at least a couple of designers, most especially Adrian Newey (all agree that Vettel is an amazing driver, but also that the recent RB cars that Newey has designed are dominant). We hear a lot from team principals like Horner, Brawn, Kaltenborn (first female in this role!). And race engineers like Rob Smedley and Rocky Rocquelin get their voice heard as well.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#155

Post by elyrly » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:31 PM UTC

bliti wrote: post #52

The interesting bit here is the development of the turbochargers. This is an area that has been slow to change over the years, due to the small amount of turbocharged vehicles available new[1]. Most turbos are used in heavy machinery (garbage trucks, big rigs, etc.), a slowly changing industry. They do not face the same regulations as regular autos. Seems they are doing away with the wastegate and replacing it with a…

Important to the discussion is superchargers are still being built on JLR vehicles. Instant HP boost is still a defining quality for superchargers.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#156

Post by walshemj » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:34 PM UTC

msantos wrote: post #145

Several F1 teams are hiring C/C++ engineers currently. Mostly looking for C brainers with experience in embedded systems and C/C++ Matlab programmers.

Interesting I am in the process of doing a cheeky spec job application to my nearest f1 team - will probably hand deliver it to the factory - maybe its time to dust of my old FORTAN skills.

I suspect engineers with expertize in cooling electronics will be in demand as if the kers/battery conks out it will destroy a cars race now.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#157

Post by sk5t » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:38 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #84

bliti wrote: post #52

The interesting bit here is the development of the turbochargers. This is an area that has been slow to change over the years, due to the small amount of turbocharged vehicles available new[1]. Most turbos are used in heavy machinery (garbage trucks, big rigs, etc.), a slowly changing industry. They do not face the same regulations as regular autos. Seems they are doing away with the wastegate and replacing it with a…

" due to the small amount of turbocharged vehicles available new"??? Pretty much 99% of diesel cars available now in Europe have turbochargers, I don't remember when was the last time I saw a car without one. And most newly announced cars for 2014(for example - new Nissan Qashqai) got rid of their naturally aspirated petrol engines in favour of smaller but turbocharged petrol engines. Maybe in the US the situation is…

Forced induction is now much more common in the US than it was five or ten years ago, even on gasoline engines. Most new BMWs in the US are turbocharged, Ford is EcoBoosting the venerable F-150, and GM has an interesting mix of turbo- and supercharged engines.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#158

Post by ericcumbee » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:42 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #149

ericcumbee wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nascar put restrictors on the car because they were hitting 212 average laps. And Nascar was not comfortable pushing the cars or tires (Nascar had open tire competition back then) farther than they wanted. so the solution was limit the amount of air an engine could take in. which created massive packs that cause 30 car wrecks. In my opinion it's probably killed more people than the cars running at 212 would have.

Rusty Wallace did 228 mph at Talladega Superspeedway without a restrictor plate in 2004. The new car probably could do a bit more than that. Racing at that speed would be insane and all the safety advances since wouldn't be effective. Further, they were implemented because Bobby Allison crashed into a retaining fence at around 210 mph. This is big no-no in NASCAR because fan's shouldn't be in danger[1]. Looking at wh…

Yeah the cars needed to be slowed down. However the Restrictor plates were the wrong way to do it.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#159

Post by gsnedders » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:54 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #86

001sky wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The silly cost and stil 840 hp @ 1x,000 rpm is just a bunch of window dressing for the Lefties. The entire enterprise of F1 will never be "green", once you take into account the production of the cars, the crash repleacements, fuel used in training and lower Fxx series, and...the fact that these clowns fly all of this junk around the WORLD to drive. They are doing to f1 what they did to the America's cup. Ba…

Have you considered,that technologies developed for F1 by lets say....Mercedes, can later be used in their regular cars and therefore improve efficiency of not just a single F1 car,but millions of cars on the road? With the promotion of turbochargers in F1, a stupid amount of research is going to go into them - and they are used in pretty much every diesel car on the road now, so if the technology can be improved fur…

Audi's opinion for years has been that Le Mans has far more relevance for road cars than F1, thus their involvement there. They've been running turbos since 2006 (when the R10 was introduced), and in 2013 were running a single-turbocharged variable-geometry-turbo diesel V6. There's far more liberty in the LMP1 class, especially when it comes to engine design. As of next year, the primary restriction on engines is fuel consumption.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#160

Post by bliti » Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 5:56 PM UTC

pedrocr wrote: post #118

bliti wrote: post #52

The interesting bit here is the development of the turbochargers. This is an area that has been slow to change over the years, due to the small amount of turbocharged vehicles available new[1]. Most turbos are used in heavy machinery (garbage trucks, big rigs, etc.), a slowly changing industry. They do not face the same regulations as regular autos. Seems they are doing away with the wastegate and replacing it with a…

>Doing away with the wastegate means that they will be limiting the amount of airflow that goes into the engine in some other way. I doubt that they are using all of the boost that the turbo creates, because it would be a risky proposition to do so. If I understood it correctly that's not what's happening. Basically you're coupling an electric motor to the turbo. When the turbo is spinning slow you feed the electrica…

I'm still a bit confused with the article. It does mention that they are not using wastegates.

Excerpt: Instead of a waste-gate, the motor will convert that excess energy into electricity by preventing the turbo from over-speeding.

I reason that they are using resistance on the electric motor to reduce the speed of the turbine. It makes more sense now. They can control the electric motor better than any wastegate by means of a computer. The resistance can then be immediately removed and boost would become available instantly because it would be spinning near the full-boost RPM (or island, as it is commonly called in the performance industry).