Why Are 2026 Formula 1 Engines Going To Lose So Much Power?
Переглядів 739,122
День томуEverything you need to know about the 2026 Formula 1 engines & power units!
How F1 Engines Make 1,000 HP - • How Tiny Formula 1 Eng...
Subscribe to Engineering Explained for more videos! - goo.gl/VZstk7
Recommended Books & Car Products - amzn.to/2BrekJm
EE Shirts! - bit.ly/2BHsiuo
Formula 1 will see a major shake-up in 2026 as it moves to new power units and all new engine regulations. The overhaul will see combustion engine power drop, while the electric motor power will be increase significantly, nearly three times! This will dramatically change the way the vehicles perform, and how teams will develop winning strategies.
We'll discuss the big picture items, like how fuel flow rate will be changing from mass flow to energy flow, how the fuel chemistry will be changing, sustainable fuels, the MGU-K & MGU-H (or lack thereof), the energy allotments per lap, and what this all means for straight line speed. We'll also look at the newly introduced airflow limits, and discuss the implications this may have on air/fuel ratios.
References:
3.5% = E10 - ag.utah.gov/wp-content/upload...
70 kg fuel - www.formula1.com/en/latest/ar...
Air Density Calculator - www.omnicalculator.com/physic...
2023 F1 Regulations - www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...
2026 F1 Regulations - www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...
Engineering Explained is a participant in the Amazon Influencer Program.
Don't forget to check out my other pages below!
Instagram: / engineeringexplained
Facebook: / engineeringexplained
Twitter: / jasonfenske13
EE Extra: / @engineeringexplainede...
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
If you haven't yet seen it, my previous F1 Engine video makes for a great intro to today's video! ukposts.info/have/v-deo/g5qjgpmsmm5qsZc.html Also I'd like to thank my graphic at 9:00 for helping to secure Leclerc's pole position today once again in Baku - congrats!
@walterbrooks3539 Рік тому
Spoiler alert!
@kevink2315 Рік тому
Thanx, I didn't catch that, you were overworking my brain ..
@xXUnoriginalNameXx33Meygaera Рік тому
Yea I hate sprint weekends because my self imposed "Social Media Ban" must go into effect Friday morning rather than Saturday in order to avoid spoilers. Good thing I just finished watching the Qualifying replay a few minutes ago.
@adrianhughes2163 Рік тому
Superb video as always, thank you! I think you need a job in F1! Best regards
@importanttingwei7747 Рік тому
0:26 you don't say anything about engine rules in WEC championship cars??
@Mr.Marbles Рік тому
Cant wait for the 800cc inline 3 200hp season in 2030
@skyhawkheavy7524 Рік тому
😅😅😅🤣
@zircon72 Рік тому
😂😂
@adamstilldrives Рік тому
You and me both. With the advancements of aerodynamics the cars will be really fast through the corners now. Monaco will be really exciting with the cars getting so close to each other
@daniusrides9889 Рік тому
😂😂😂 slowly the 2 stroke are coming back 👌🏼
@dickJohnsonpeter Рік тому
They'll be electric by then I'm sure.
@daniel.s.stefanov Рік тому
Each year my car gets closer and closer to an F1 car, and I've spent $0 on upgrades! Thanks, FIA!
@Corteum 10 місяців тому
At this rate, soon you'll only need 50hp to reach F1 status lmao
@TheIronRafael 10 місяців тому
My car gets the same mileage on my city as the new Corvette gets on the average american city because my city is so poorly designed. Guess I've also gotta thank the mayor for making it seem like I have a supercar. xD
@josephoberlander 10 місяців тому
Meanwhile NASCAR is making all the noise and speed at LeMans.. lol. We used to joke about it compared to F1, but now it seems as if the better and faster vehicles are the next gen over at NASCAR. I stil have no idea why F1 is hell-bent on racing to the bottom.
@jesperhammarlund300 10 місяців тому
well if you ignore the MGU-K which provides literally half the power.
@SCYN0 10 місяців тому
it doesnt. Just the balance shifts more towards the Electric motor. Its still just as powerfull in 2026
@brkbtjunkie Рік тому
Soon they’ll be mandated to just play 50cc Mario kart with a sticky controller.
@jp3630 29 днів тому
They all talk crap about emissions, sustainability and ecology but they hinder you from repairing your car....
@AkiraHartono 23 дні тому
Formula Peel P50
@schmojo33 22 дні тому
@@AkiraHartono After that its going a be the F1 teaming pushing a driver in a Little Tikes Cozy Coup style car with his little F1 driver legs running Fred Flintstone style and the team is going to promote being powered by vegan burritos.
@dominik13579 19 днів тому
Too improve racing, each driver gets to use 2 bananas and 1 turtle
@jaydee9086 9 днів тому
Why even race? Just have a bingo or lottery set up and pull ping pong balls out of a tumbler. Think of the excitement!
@brrrake Рік тому
I really think active aero is coming because the level of aerodynamic drag we have now with reduced full power as a function of the increased power still with 4MJ swing... I'm very unexcited about '26. Great explanation!
@Mike23443 Рік тому
No, there won't be active aero in f1. The sport has always had the mission of developing new technology to introduce into regular cars later down the line. Aero isn't practical for regular cars because they're too slow to generate it. Active suspension is the next thing they'll allow. Especially with them moving towards ground effect aero, active suspension would benefit these cars a lot more than active aero, and developing new suspension technology can and will be useful for regular cars, especially given how heavy they'll be getting with all those batteries.
@Ninja98x Рік тому
Maybe it would make a comeback eventually but in the short term I think we'd see the teams focus on reducing drag as much as possible. I could see there being a tradeoff point where it's faster to have more straight line speed, coast longer (thus recharging the batteries more), than higher cornering speed. Which is really backwards to think about because normally faster corner speed = quicker lap times, but we're talking about an edge case here. Kinda like the hybrid LMP1 cars, where at Le Mans they were slower at the end of the straights than the non-hybrid LMP1 and they had less downforce. But they made up for it by being able to deploy the electric boost early on the straights. Much like a drag race where if you launch hard enough off the line, you can get to the finish line first even if your opponent has a higher trap speed.
@Ninja98x Рік тому
@@Mike23443 that's not exactly true. Hell even pickup trucks have had (for a decade now) active grille shutters to reduce drag at highway speeds.
@user-qx4bp5rf3n Рік тому
@@Mike23443 That depends how you define aero. I'm pretty sure he is referring to optimizing drag rather than downforce - which in that case ties into fuel efficiency rather than aero grip.
@brrrake Рік тому
@@Mike23443 disagree completely. We're talking about the sport that has DRS which has no relevance for road cars. The main issue with the 26 regulations is a reduction in possible output and reducing drag via movable surfaces is far superior to active ride height control. They WILL need a way to reduce drag.
@LupinYonderboy Рік тому
What annoys me is the hybrid era is in the name of reduced emissions. If they really wanted to reduce F1 emissions, they'd have fewer races in the season! By far the biggest polution in F1 comes from shipping the whole circus from country to country. We could have kept the V10s and knocked a few races off the calendar and had a greener, more exciting sport overall.
@C.I... Рік тому
Even changing the order of races would improve things massively in that regard. It won't even matter when the switch to synthetic fuel, so I don't understand why they wouldn't just make them sound good by allowing 3 litre NA V12s at that point.
@EMPower91 Рік тому
That is a good point. If that were the case though, the engineers wouldnt be pushed to limits of extracting as much as possible from the available technology. I think that would result in the teams not learning as much, which is not a great motive for the manufacturers. That is besides the prestige of course.
@LupinYonderboy Рік тому
@@EMPower91 I do love the technical development side of F1 ( even though sometimes I'd like to see all the drivers compete in the same car, just to see ). I think we are kidding ourselves if we think F1 tech actually translates to road cars in the long run.
@EMPower91 Рік тому
@@LupinYonderboy there are examples for F1-developed tech that is used in street cars like active suspension and KERS, just to name a couple and there is probably many more
@ilmostro16 Рік тому
True, but doing that reduces the revenues and profits. More races = more $ revenues/profits. So they want to maximize races AND improve the emissions factor at the same time.
@nimblybimbly4002 Рік тому
I like a conclusion like that. When you're using real data and actual science sometimes the results aren't a great soundbite.
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
Haha, glad you enjoyed, curious to learn more about why that rule exists!
@jamespingel8730 Рік тому
@@EngineeringExplained If I had to guess it might be to make sure teams aren't pushing extra air through the exhaust (maybe with fuel injection every other 4 stroke cycle or something) for aerodynamic advantages like they used to do with blown diffusers, coanda exhausts, etc.
@f2cmadmaxx Рік тому
@@jamespingel8730 Yeah, something like this - these rules don't tend to get introduced unless it's been found someone has been abusing the lack of control there.
@kb9knd Рік тому
I don’t know. I think you burnt a few of my brain cells.
@pkt1213 Рік тому
@@f2cmadmaxxis not abusing something. It is just about smart engineering if something isn't specifically disallowed in the rules.
@johnnysinger3353 7 місяців тому
If I wanted to watch Formula E… I’d watch Formula E.
@SatanDotExe 11 місяців тому
I feel like we all know this but nobody seems to have written it. They're making the cars more "green" for two reasons in my opinion: 1) To improve brand image, ultimately for profit. 2) F1 is often a playground for new technology development for road cars. These new cars might have technologies which benefit traditional cars, although unlikely. I also agree that it's pointless really in the grand scheme of things.
@DenDodde 7 місяців тому
I dare you to name a single F1 technology that made it into a traditional car.
@omgawesomeomg 7 місяців тому
@@DenDoddeRegen braking
@tiansivive 6 місяців тому
@@omgawesomeomg You mean the one the Prius had back in 07, 7 years before the modern hybrids?
@Appletank8 6 місяців тому
@@DenDoddecarbon fiber, engine and transmission oil manufacturers probably getting good data, maybe their brakes too?
@jorge8596 6 місяців тому
@@DenDoddeactive/adaptive suspension, and buttons on the steering wheel
@MarioDallaRiva Рік тому
My only F1 race in person was in 1989 Montreal. I heard the Ferrari 3500 NA V12 before seeing it visually as it took to the back straight after the hairpin. Still makes the hairs on my neck stand up thinking obout that sound and seeing Berger suspension sparking off the surface of the track. The sound experience is unforgettable. The old days of F1 ahh
@michaelj8582 Рік тому
youre a lucky man!
@fishingwithaiden2685 Рік тому
I was lucky enough to hear the v12s during the historic gp at COTA in 2022. I swear you can feel the ground shaking as they go past. Luckily I was there for the v8 runs with Mario andretti as well. I just feel so lucky to have seen those beautiful pieces of history racing
@jacksonh3034 Рік тому
@Fishing With Aiden where were you sitting?
@fishingwithaiden2685 Рік тому
@@jacksonh3034 general admission at turn 1
@Tom--Ace 11 місяців тому
Modern F1 is not F1
@abnfalcon3901 Рік тому
I just cannot imagine how the future of F1 will look like after that. Seeing Crazy Aero Jets running on the tracks with scooter engines
@DroneStrike1776 Рік тому
Next power plant, Flinstone foot power.
@TheSteinbitt Рік тому
Electric? Isn’t that obvious?
@Sonny_McMacsson Рік тому
@@TheSteinbitt So, basically slot cars.
@spencerwong1993 Рік тому
@@tango_uniform the thing is car tech is changing. F1 is intended to be at the forefront of car tech - every year, an increasing number of consumer cars are BEVs and hybrids, so it makes sense that F1 is further electrifying itself and relying less on the gasoline engine. I would personally love if every car in Chicago were electric, because then I could walk along the lakefront without smelling any emissions from Lakeshore Drive. I think it’s a net good if F1 helps lead automobile electrification
@kipchpineda7161 Рік тому
@@spencerwong1993 If every car was electric you'd be getting emissons from the power plants of coal going like crazy to supply the whole of chicago with EV's. EV's are only best currently if kept in small numbers(Not even talking about the catastrophical amount of resources needed to make a whole city have electrical chargers for EV's), unless in the next 10-30 years we move to something more efficient like nuclear power plants or another new method of energy power plants are discovered and become wildly available. And not just that, there's about 1.44 thousand million ICE powered vehicles currently in the world, that's about 18% percent of the world's human population! That 18% ain't going any where! since ICE cars have a longer life span (If properly maintained) than EV's, batteries don't last no way near what an ICE platform does. ICE will not entirely die, it will have to transform, adapt to the current needs, EV's aren't the future even car manofacturers knows this. Hybrid is the best as of now, the best options for medium and perhaps long term is synthetic fuels.
@vickarch 11 місяців тому
Excellent explanation of the upcoming rules for F1 power unit. Many give the changes point by point, but are unable to explain, quantify, and compare. Thank you.
@gottliebdee263 2 місяці тому
Engineering Explained. Has to be in the top 5 of UKposts channels. Well done Jason.
@ecsolha Рік тому
I miss the 3L V10... 😞
@timXJ220 Рік тому
Everyone who cares about the sport does.
@yessitsme6884 Рік тому
I'll never forget that sound
@tunedmonkeys Рік тому
ahhh yes....the screaming good ol' days
@tturi2 Рік тому
even if they were turbo v10 hybrid
@ecsolha Рік тому
@@tturi2 F1 V10 were NA and no hybrid. They did start with 3.5L, then after the Imola accidents downsized to 3L.
@jafooli Рік тому
Why are they so concerned about fuel efficiency when they fly military planes over before each Grand Prix
@boywhohasl1vedhascometodie469 Рік тому
The Climate Change Circus🤡
@sidharthcs2110 11 місяців тому
That's has nothing to do with the FIA
@tomlathrop4094 2 місяці тому
@jafooli flying military planes overhead doesnt increase fuel use or pollution. All military pilots need to log a certain amount of hours flying to keep proficient. Flyovers are part of that time.
@Danikonaranjo 9 місяців тому
Can't enjoy more your explanations, thank you very much 4 your content.
@wild_lee_coyote 11 місяців тому
I think the min air temp and max pressure is to try and close some loopholes someone discovered. Maybe using the turbo pressure as a simple air pump that can be used to run the engine briefly on no fuel. The air temp may be for preventing teams from using cryogenic air to super cool the inter coolers in the pits before going on track, especially for qualifying. Some rules are to prevent edge cases and loopholes that F1 engineers are famous for finding
@davelowets 9 місяців тому
No. Cooling the intercooler with a cryo gas prior to qualifying would do basically nothing as an advantage. It takes laps for the car to get up to speed and start the timer, and ANY cooling effect "sprayed" onto the intercooler in the pits would be LONG gone by then
@JainZar1 2 місяці тому
The Intake cooler is an air/water intercooler. Switching on the pumps for the hot lap, could reduce the temperature for the inlet air to below that 10 K limit. And depending on what interval the 3 GJ/h is measured, you could get more power out of the engine than intended. The pressure limit is basically there to reduce development and engine costs. Else you could make the motor far smaller for the same power, which would be a huge weight saving.
@dodenmanniskan8846 2 місяці тому
So FIA will soon be the only engineers allowed at this point. Msy they go to hell for such heresy.
@Burgo361 Рік тому
F1 rules often feel arbitrary and confusing, I think they just like to mess with us.
@enolopanr9820 Рік тому
they gotta be smoking something wacky to come up with all of this
@mitchell-wallisforce7859 Рік тому
@@enolopanr9820 I'm calling ketamine.
@ghoulbuster1 Рік тому
They don't care about the sport, it's all a circus to push EVs.
@456MrPeople Рік тому
No F1 is about advancing combustion technology. By making combustion engines more efficient and having synthetic fuels, we can make engines stick around alongside electric cars. Are they going to be the high revving NA engines of the past? No, but at least we're still getting an engine.
@mandernachluca3774 Рік тому
@@456MrPeople First, no, the Formula one was never about technological advancement, it was about manufacturers pride, like pretty much every other sport. The technological advancement thing came about with the political views turning towards solving climate change. Second, don't be confused, the combustion engine will die out and it will come faster than you think, especially in such a political circus like Formula 1.
@EvanCalder 9 місяців тому
F1 is the pinnacle of automotive engineering. I think the point of having them play around with green tech is getting those engineers developing technologies that could one day go into your fuel efficient car. You could allow bigger engines with big turbos but is that relevant anymore.
@rozburg 6 місяців тому
Exactly, most these people in comments don't understand. F1 is about engineering. If they want loud noise, and inefficiency with minimum engineering: Funny car drag racing is their thing.
@zaklarue-buckley3906 Місяць тому
It's a spectator sport. It's about entertainment. The engineers will do their thing whatever the regulations are. These regulations have given us a formula where it is too expensive for new teams to enter, the cars sound like hoovers and the rules are static year after year because the development costs are so high. Still could be worse, there was the year when all the cars had phallic appendages on the nose-cones…
@larryc1616 7 днів тому
Hybrids are better in every way to ICE - power, braking, fuel efficiency
@jitinvp3358 Рік тому
Thank you for this explanation! Really enjoyed it
@alpanex21 Рік тому
13:46 : the engines may very well be running around λ~3. The pre-chamber allows them to do so with a closer-to-stoichiometry mixture inside it and a much leaner mixture in the main cylinder, way beyond the flammability limits for gasoline/E20, as you already indicated, which can however ignite this time due to the jets bursting out of that pre-chamber. The beauty of TJI it is! 😊
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
Yes, discussed in my previous video. Studies indicated λ~2 possible with active pre-chambers (something F1 isn't using, only passive). So it's not nearly as simple with limited control. More here: ukposts.info/have/v-deo/g5qjgpmsmm5qsZc.html
@alpanex21 Рік тому
@@EngineeringExplained I had already watched that. Beautifully elaborated on! In the MC20 one as well, even though the configurations are quite different of course. My point was that limits, currently possible in latest F1 engines, are way beyond λ~2, as the whiteboard alluded to! Controlling combustion is of course the key here. Mixture preparation is really crucial, which is important to capture very accurately using CFD simulations. Stratification levels inside the pre-chamber are extremely high, due to the shape of body and orifices, which ultimately dictates the λ levels close to the electrodes. Source: seeing real geometries and CFD post-pro on screen daily due to my profession (amongst which motorsport and high performance ICE OEMs). Thanks again for your work 💪
@candeyhab Рік тому
🤓
@pavulon5000 Рік тому
@@candeyhab 🤡
@RenM 11 місяців тому
Another thing to take into account is the trapping efficiency of the engine. With Miller valve timings it can be significantly reduced, resulting in a charge cooling effect at the cost of higher boost pressure needed for a given massflow.
@reilandeubank Рік тому
My guess for why all of these rules exist (not just the air but everything together) is to really put a limit on exactly how much can be thrown into the engine; we know teams are chasing power gains, and by putting hard ceilings on fuel AND air, it almost requires engineers to put work into thermal efficiency gains and electric power gains, which i'm guessing is what Liberty wants from F1
@aimless3827 Рік тому
A lot of new invention for aerodynamic came out from these reason.
@PSA78 Рік тому
And lets not forget that they are trying to keep it interesting to watch, if they get limited by electric energy now then the drivers choice of when to use the energy to attack or defend a position will come in to play. It could get really interesting, at least in theory.
@SuperSpruce Рік тому
And at the same time they're banning the electric motor on the turbocharger and arbitrarily limiting the battery capacity (bigger batteries are heavier so that's a natural deterrent) and engine displacement.
@RockSolitude 11 місяців тому
@@aimless3827 no, most major advancements in F1 aerodynamics came from a time when the rules were less restrictive about what the teams can do.
@RockSolitude 11 місяців тому
Unfortunately that is not the case either, because they're basically keeping the current engines for 2026 but getting rid of a lot of the stuff that made them so advanced. They are also standardizing more engine parts for 2026 and are placing tighter regulations everywhere else on the engine.
@ThePhreakazoid Рік тому
Will you ever make a video abour Omega 1 engine? Sounds like a cool idea. Thanks for the videos, I love them!
@johnhancock5542 11 місяців тому
very competent technical explanation
@TranqueiraCars Рік тому
This is what great content looks like. Thanks, Jason! Love to see science presented in an interesting yet accurate way like you do.
@Tommmmmmmmmmmm Рік тому
bonus for using the metric system
@roostfezza7563 Рік тому
I wish there were not so many rules, have basic limitations to engine capacity and types of fuel and fuel useage. Freedom to choose engine type, configuration, layout etc. Likewise for suspension, aero etc. It would be more exciting to watch and understand.
@fatmangoboom7722 23 дні тому
Beautiful break down instant subscribed
@hello456able 11 місяців тому
Very good technical info👍
@gregbarth8893 Рік тому
The boost limit is likely there for two things, limiting the partially closed throttle control of an over speed compressor and a to limit the aerodynamic benefits of blowing exhaust on aerodynamic surfaces.
@davelowets 9 місяців тому
I don't see that at all
@andresmartinezramos7513 5 місяців тому
Exhaust-blown aerodynamics have already been banned for quite some time
@rimka11 4 місяці тому
Ok, how can you make so much boost with partially closed throttle? I think you need high energy exhaust flow for that. And second, for aerodynamic effects, may be better open throttles but with lower boost? I think this all has something to do with engine braking.
@zzavakos Рік тому
15:00 I think the airflow limit is to prevent the engine departments from pursuing aero gains through exhaust gas velocity tuning exiting the rear for downforce. An engine is just a fancy air pump...
@456MrPeople Рік тому
Could blown diffusers be coming back?
@olympiand4073 9 місяців тому
your ability to talk on versus drone on at length about highly complicated math which then results in more complication is amazing and requires so many separate talents . Your mastery of engineering is just the first of many of them. Thank you for this!
@rimka11 4 місяці тому
LOL highly complicated 10 grade math. Yes much talent.
@redmini2892 Рік тому
Interesting video! You should make a video about engine sound in general, like, what gives each engine its characteristic sound (four, five, six, eight, ten, etc. pot engines) and the components that contribute to engine/exhaust notes. Please 😉
@gottliebdee263 2 місяці тому
I’m not religious but I can assure you, the sound of a good V8 comes from the vocal cords God himself.
@Senorbarnez Місяць тому
@@gottliebdee263love V8s myself, but for F1 of I'd say the best sounding engines were the V10s and V12. And V10s of around 2000 era sounded immense.
@gottliebdee263 Місяць тому
@@Senorbarnez I'm the same. A cross plane V8 for my daily driver but there is something about a shrieking V10/V12 that is spine tingling. If you never got to experience a Grand Prix back in the day in the flesh, it's a shame but you've really missed out.
@Senorbarnez Місяць тому
@@gottliebdee263Yes, it's that shrieking 18,000rpm that can't be matched today. I never went back in the day, but did go to Silverstone last year for the F1 , was really looking forward to hearing an F1 engine in real life, but came away highly unimpressed with the sound of today's engines. When watching the onboard view on TV I feel those V6 turbos, even at full chat, sound like mopeds strangely.
@gottliebdee263 Місяць тому
@@Senorbarnez lol. Who knows maybe they'll bring them back. Silverstone is a great spectator track, (apart from the food prices).
@gabednconfused Рік тому
Former F1 design engineer here... great video. Done tons of these calcs over the years... all looked good to me. Years ago (probably 2016) we had a working group to think of ideas around the energy flow diagram, to a) see if we could figure out what Ferrari was doing cleverly and b) try to come up with various nefarious ways to do similar or worse. Mercedes was quite risk-averse, but we really had nothing left to unturn at that moment... we looked at hybridization of ancillaries, various battery layouts etc... but most of the efficiencies found in these rule sets are in combustion/lean-limit optimizations (through fuel formulations, atomization strategies, air injection, mixing etc...) and MGUH strategies. Since the latter is gone, you will see a lot of time spent on fuel... Could you make a fuel which has a lhv at one temp and another as it raises? Or one that has the same attributes at different pressures? Those things will be tried. I am confident you will see another step change in BTE, which will bring these back to 50%. It will just be a matter of time. Interesting frontier. Ill check out your other vids.
@hypedbros8329 Рік тому
How did you get your job bro
@MC-re9zj Рік тому
Wasn't it speculated that Ferrari were running pulsed electrical interference on the FIA fuel flow meter?
@darkalman Рік тому
@@MC-re9zj Speculated yes, possibly that they were altering the fuel flow rates out of phase with the fuel flow meter. Meaning that the fuel flow meter checks the rate in pulses rather than continuously, so if you can raise the rate in between check pulses you can get an advantage. Also rumors that they were deliberately allowing thin engine oil to either leak past the cylinder into the chamber, or into the intake via a deliberate leak in the turbo charger. Thereby using engine oil as a fuel booster. The evidence was the limits placed on engine oil burning shortly after. There's also been rumors of pre-chamber fuel tanks in the engine, with the idea being that fuel flow can be increased at times when the engine is reving low to fill a tank on the engine side of the fuel flow meter. That way you can increase fuel flow into the engine when needed but still comply with the sensor. This one was the crackpot theories of how the Mercedes Party Mode supposedly worked, but it was later revealed that the engine was just functionally 2 years ahead of development of everyone else so they had power to spare early in the Turbo hybrid era and were turning the engines down to save mileage. One of the Mercedes engines was apparently cracked open by the FIA to confirm they weren't doing that... they weren't
@gabednconfused Рік тому
Well… maybe I should make a video on how I got my job 🤔. Also all your crackpot theories were correct, Ferrari was very clever but they weren’t clever enough to hide the performance gradually over the season. The FFM tricking was real and Red Bull ratted them with a brilliant document. I don’t think it’s public.
@moeez1211 Рік тому
@@gabednconfused I’d love to see that video!
@anydaynow01 Рік тому
I wonder how much this will affect the brake sizes / cooling ducts, with all that energy recovery it will be interesting to see where teams go with this.
@bradweinberger6907 Рік тому
Probably not much since they use the hot brakes to help heat up the tires.
@gkinghsmith9352 Рік тому
Is the energy recovery only on the rear wheels? If yes, these cars are going to be terrible to drive.
@bradweinberger6907 Рік тому
@@gkinghsmith9352 I'm sure they can figure out brake balance
@mrvwbug4423 Рік тому
You might see a modest reduction in brake size to shed unsprung weight
@geemy9675 Рік тому
@@bradweinberger6907you can pre heat the tires with tires blankets and then bring them to temperature just from the tires doing their job. once the tires are up to Reno having less heat from the brakes is an advantage
@moreiralves 4 місяці тому
THANK YOU!
@ruthun Рік тому
Let me just blow your mind. Nice one, Jason. As usual.
@heitorpaulon8906 Рік тому
I really enjoy when you go deep on the technical aspect of F1. Great Video. There is any chance of the cars become slower with those new rules?
@vikineo Рік тому
Man.. How can I say, you are the best engineering teacher ever and every engineer should watch your videos.
@Ivan_am8 2 місяці тому
Great video!
@HariGtt Рік тому
Very good video. My only issue is with the section at 8:33 . Although the max battery usage calculations are correct AFAIK (I'm not gonna check your math, mine is usually bad), it only takes into account one straight, not the whole lap. Since the current regs only allow 4MJ of energy deployment per lap instead of the theoretical 6 (4 in the Energy store, 2 recovered at some pointt) and the new regs removed that limitation completly, you might be limited in the very long straights like you mentioned in Baku, but you have far more available energy deployment per lap (max 13MJ, 4 ES + 9 recovered). I couldn't find figures for how much MGU-H is deploying to K in a current F1 car so it could account for those extra 9MJ but I doubt it.
@trkarting 2 місяці тому
Your point is so true. Cars will have the same battery capacity but charge / discharge rates should be different.
@RSGTomcat Рік тому
I think those IAT and charge air pressure limitations are aimed at preventing F1 teams from adapting some sort of crazy charge air regulator system on the engine intakes. They could theoretically run insanely highly charge air pressures (15+ bar) air through the intercooler and then run that high pressure/near ambient temperature charge air through a high flow rate regulator to reduce the pressure to a more reasonable useful manifold pressure while drastically cooling the charge air in the process due to adiabatic expansion. This could get IATs far below ambient at the regulation intake pressure (possibly even to freezing temperatures depending on the expansion ratio), greatly increasing intake air density, and also improving combustion stability. I tried to design something like this for a regular turbo car, but it wasn't feasible for a regular car/engine setup. It was far too complex, cumbersome, expensive, difficult to manufacture by hand, and would have required a crazy tuning solution because of the additional sensory/feedback inputs to compensate for variable ambient temperatures and available boost/turbo lag. The returns were also diminishing on a regular vehicle setup and theoretical benefits were mostly only in the super high rev range (IE even more turbo lag). F1 teams wouldn't have the same limitations, and they are chasing milliseconds so they could pull it off, and possibly consider it as a valuable proposition.
@mriguy3202 Рік тому
The changes should result in a lot of battery power used at acceleration then tapering off. What if they added a variable mass (or variable geometry) flywheel for better energy management? You could get off the line faster and store energy in the flywheel in addition to the battery storage.
@Cochran05 Рік тому
Solito negotium, great vid. Box2 - Question about running flat out duration. You are leaving out that charging at the same time as expending the battery energy. Therefore it could go a little longer than 11.4 sec ?
@kieranmcclean6256 11 місяців тому
Very interesting but I will have to watch it again!
@jakubstaniszewski477 Рік тому
That intake pressure limit got me thinking....Just a shot in the dark but it occurs to me you might be able to "replace" the mgu-h with a kind of hyper-egr which in stead of cooling and diluting the charge could heat up and pressurize it to increase MEP or even be used to control compression ignition.....
@maxluthor6800 Рік тому
bro what does this mean in simpleton english
@jakubstaniszewski477 Рік тому
Recovery of exhaust gas energy by taking them back into the cylinders at certain times for increased efficiency
@uncleelias Рік тому
@@jakubstaniszewski477 Doesn't that only work for inefficient fuel burn? You want denser cool air which carries more Oxygen to burn all of the fuel, not hotter air with more CO2 from previous fuel burn
@jakubstaniszewski477 Рік тому
@@uncleelias unless you have 140-170% excess air in your charge
@iaial0 Рік тому
That's another great point
@anydaynow01 Рік тому
4.8 bar is insane! I won't be surprised if teams aren't going to be running much more ethanol, especially with the new joule based flow rate.
@ryryshredder148 Рік тому
It’s in the video. It’s increasing from 10% to 20%.
@gkinghsmith9352 Рік тому
But theres's also a limit on how much fuel you can carry, so it's a tight balancing act.
@JakkiPi Рік тому
So if I have investments in ethanol I should be happy about this? I can also get kickbacks for fighting climate change right?
@geemy9675 Рік тому
@@gkinghsmith9352not sure about the tight balancing act. seems like the more rules you introduce the less balancing you have to do, and the more the rules dictate your choices. for instance if there is no power limit you might not want to have the most power because more power is less drivable, less reliable, wears tires quicker and uses more fuel ( more weight) now if you have a pretty "low" fuel flow limit like current and incoming rules, power is limited and you want to have all of this limited power other wise you'll get passed on the straights... same for fuel, if you have a high minimum amount of oxygen that reduces fuel energy density, you might want to use the least amount allowed to get the best energy density. makes it easier for everyone to optimize the parameters, you reduce the research costs and make teams more equal regardless of the budgets. seems like it's where they're heading probably trying to make F1 more exciting to watch...the tight balancing act is there, trying to create healthy competition without going too far and transforming F1 into racing series where all cars are identical
@iaial0 Рік тому
4.8 bar of boost is a lotta pressure. They must have some crazy piston design
@paulmongroo6042 7 місяців тому
My thought on the air flow limitation is to discourage the previous practice of blowing hot/cold exhaust air through the diffuser. I know there is a definitive rule against such a thing, but maybe an extra way to prevent a different area being blown.
@harrisnasir5753 7 місяців тому
Wait, air flow limitation is for the intake to the engine, this video does not discuss anything about the exhaust flow limit, unless they waste energy by cooling the air and exhausting it back out through the diffuser..?!
@dehypnotizerz 2 місяці тому
Damn, a really good vid!
@mahju Рік тому
Maybe the A/F ratio limiting lean is to avoid teams continuing to run the cars engine at at high revs at low speeds and using the air through exhausts to aid airflow, aka last decade’s blown diffusers ?
@Appletank8 Рік тому
i did always wonder if there's enough exhaust pressure to produce thrust
@pjoffrion Рік тому
Moto GP is where it's at. Speed, SOUND, talent, 5-6 engine manufacturers, etc.
@boulderbobb 11 місяців тому
another great video! much appreciated. one question: you make a comment that implies that fuel with a higher octane rating delivers more power. my understanding is that increasing octane slows down combustion allowing higher combustion pressure/temperature and reducing detonation or pre ignition - so an engine with high compression ratio (or higher turbo boost) would require a higher octane to perform as designed. My 1973 Porsche was designed to run on the then-available-in-the-US "unleaded" - it has an 8.5 to one compression ratio and runs well on the lowest octane fuel I can buy today. It will not put out more power if I run a higher octane fuel, in fact in runs worse. A modern car with computer control and knock sensor will put out more power with a higher octane fuel as it can optimize fuel and spark maps, correct?. I'm thinking that this is what you meant. Thanks again and keep these great videos coming.
@miguelespinaluribe7109 11 місяців тому
It is the best conclusion, you are the best teacher in this stuff.
@jeremyrice7290 Рік тому
Great video as always. I think F1 is tying themselves in knots with such a complex set of multi factorial restrictions.
@MoptopTofer Рік тому
Well I mean that's the point. This is the "Formula" in Formula 1 that engineers have to work with. The restrictions are what makes the engineering competition aspect of the sport so interesting. They have to get creative to work around roadblocks and obstacles set for them.
@jeremyrice7290 Рік тому
@@MoptopTofer I get that but the rules risk conflicting with each other and stifling innovation and the excitement of the sport as races will be settled by a bunch of specialist engineers and lawyers in a court room rather than on the track with drivers they should set some basic parameters and let the engineers engineer and the drivers drive.
@realMaverickBuckley 11 місяців тому
@YUNG CHLOROFORM But is this supposed to be the craziest fastest most vuscious cars that only the best can wrangle round a track or is it 'make the most of it with these extra 100 restrictions because we like to please the green agenda and Lewis.' It's absurd. The entire F1 calendar puts out 1/180th of the Carbon than 1 container ship does. Why can't F1 be the best cars on the planet and everything else takes up some slack? The cars today are slower than 20 years ago , check the lap times (and when you do , remember they weren't running on slicks). They sound shite and the drivers are all the same.
@pisquared1366 5 місяців тому
@@realMaverickBuckley absolutely spot on! F1 is a clown show of european elites promoting agendas and fostering the ultimate hubris of modern society and control hungry politicians, by constantly adding more regulations supposedly in the name of more exciting racing, when in effect they've created a monstrosity of nearly zero relevance to the sporting aspects of F1 and relevant technological excellence (by not increasing costs exponentially)
@juliusdavies2005 3 місяці тому
@@realMaverickBuckley Bollocks. Catalunya 2007 : Pole Position 1'21.421" , 2020 : Pole Position 1'15.584". Same track layout.
@RallyRat Рік тому
Maybe teams will be using the Miller cycle or something similar to increase thermal efficiency at the expense of volumetric efficiency. Boost limits would effectively put a cap on how far they can go with that strategy.
@Nafeels Рік тому
The Miller cycle works best with a roots-type supercharger so it’d be interesting to see FiA probably allowing twincharge systems. It would make for a heck of a launch when the light turns green.
@mitchell-wallisforce7859 Рік тому
@@Nafeels "it’d be interesting to see FiA probably allowing twincharge systems" There's the problem. It would require the FIA to allow something...
@456MrPeople Рік тому
Superchargers aren't even restricted with current or future engine regulations. But you can't use an MGU-H with a supercharger. So maybe supercharging will make a comeback.
@taylorwhedon9486 9 місяців тому
@@456MrPeoplethat would be interesting, but superchargers are less thermally efficient.
@maxwellkeeling3781 Рік тому
As for the ultra lean A/F ratios, that could be in part to the limit of air allowed in for non-combustible events. They are going to limit engine braking, among another options of allowing air into the combustion chamber with no combustion to also cool it. Provided they use a higher ethanol fuel source, spraying in fuel they never combust will greatly reduce cylinder temperatures.
@brianb-p6586 2 місяці тому
Engine braking? We're not descending a mountain in a truck here. The brakes brake the car - engine braking seems irrelevant to a properly built race car.
@diegolopezzz18 9 місяців тому
Thanks Toto
@answeris4217 Рік тому
I hate that they are limiting the cars so much. I would love to see the innovation within their cost cap and the use of a hybrid system. For example if one team decides to have an EV powertrain then let them. Limit the battery and engine size and maximum gas but not the way power is used. Everybody has the same amount of potential power... now figure it out.
@tedferkin Рік тому
No team would go down the EV route in that case, it's all down to energy density. Gasoline is far too dense compared to any battery technology, and anyway there is already Formula-E
@answeris4217 Рік тому
@@tedferkin why not. You would have engines still but running at their uptimum rpm. The most efficient rpm all the time.
@de_oScar Рік тому
@@answeris4217 batteries are very heavy compared to fuel. Current cars are 200 kilograms fatter than just 10 years ago. Weight has borderline unbelievable consequences for everything in racing: acceleration, braking, cornering speeds, tyre wear - all suffer with every kilogram. iirc Adrian Sutil many years ago was preaching for bigger minimum driver weight limit, because he was taller than most and couldn't lose as much, to the point he was experimenting with carrying less 'drink' in the car and trying to minimize it as long as his performance didn't drop. All that ridiculous effort to save probably less than a kilogram!
@answeris4217 Рік тому
@@de_oScar if everybody has the same battery but not limited on how or what can power the drivetrain
@toejah Рік тому
@@answeris4217 Formal E has an exclusivity contract on EV racing with the FIA.
@davidhuber6251 Рік тому
That exceeded my recommended daily allowance of math by a factor of 4 😝 I like the conclusion and await your journey trying to figure it out!
@AlexanderGee Рік тому
With the MGU-H gone would there be an incentive to bank as much boost pressure as possible in the intake manifold for antilag? If so I could see the max boost rule existing to head that off.
@stevenwalton1370 Рік тому
Great content Jason I’m not going to pretend to understand it all but in answer to your last question as to why - surely the answer is the 15:12 need to remain relevant to the quest for sustainable ice based engines which is key to attracting and engaging the likes of Porche to the show!
@InsideOfMyOwnMind Рік тому
Can't wait for the all EV F1 with playing cards in the wheel spokes.
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
Yo but legit our bikes as kids sounded great.
@ChadWilson Рік тому
Formula E is already proving that EVs work for racing.
@C.I... Рік тому
@@ChadWilson I get the exact opposite impression
@InsideOfMyOwnMind Рік тому
@@EngineeringExplained Your mom get pissed off when all the clothes pins went missing?
@russellramsey8389 Рік тому
Great vid as always!!! At the end of your video, I think the reason for the A/F limit is because some teams have learned from the current rules and are very close to the new A/F rule. IMO I think some teams are running extreme lean conditions and also a controlled detonating? Honda being one of them. The controlled detonation is giving a very high cylinder pressure without the aid of using the conventional fuel amount to get normal amount of cylinder pressure.
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
At lambda 2.5? If you watch my previous video, there's a paper by a previous F1 powertrain engineer that says you need an active chamber for lambda 2 (F1 uses passive). So it's a big jump, and using worse tech. It's difficult to believe they're running that lean!
@Apophion Рік тому
Controlled detonation may also be for keeping the turbo spooled.
@03_Frank Рік тому
@@EngineeringExplained f1 engines run with lambda
@dragosmihai3489 Рік тому
@@03_Frank +1 - @EE don't mix manifold pressure with air pressure in the chamber. Secondly there is bounce back from the Miller cycle at intake, need to account for that spike. Thirdly of course you can have below 10C over ambient, you can have below ambient simply by cooling compressed air then iso-baric expand to the intake plenum - but only factory teams tend to have air-to-water intercoolers powerful enough to cool the air so close to ambient before expansion (it's in the team-area, of responsability not the PU area, funnily enough) - the 10C over ambient in meant to close the gap between the factory and customer team actual available power. The world of F1 engines is an amazing place, congrats for bringing a bit of light on how amazing those engines actually are (which I could praise in the same way any TV comentary team since 2014 onwards)
@russellramsey8389 Рік тому
@@EngineeringExplained IMHO I believe Mercedes, Ferrari and Honda have their PC in the piston crown now. Its a much larger PC and got rid of the heat issues with the PC in the head. This PC in the piston crown makes a rapid combustion, spark assisted TJI, HCCI-like combustion that could light off extreme lean conditions of 2.0> lambda even before the spark plug fires. Hondas video shows this happening in a public video. A ilmor engineer has referred to these engines as "controlled detonation". So now they're getting the lean burn results of an active PC with a passive PC. Also, I believe this is why there is a new intake temperature rule.
@nitrokid125 11 місяців тому
Maybe the 4.8bar limit is to avoid strategies of very high power during small periods of time. If the frequency of controlling the limit of the MJ/h is low, you can decide to use high boost and high fuel flow for some period and 'sacrifice' another period.
@republikadugave420 8 місяців тому
At this rate we will have them riding solar powered bicycles by 2050
@harrisnasir5753 7 місяців тому
Even then they gonna limit god given sun rays absorption rate by rewriting the bible
@1961Password Рік тому
If it were possible to run strippers (CAT's) in the intake / charge cooler to increase O2 density then it could make sense to limit air intake volume which could also explain how F1 can apparently run so lean
@RitchieMonroe Рік тому
Loved the carbon footprint pyramid and explanation of the hypocricy, thank you.
@virxal 4 місяці тому
Well Done. What will be the reason for the new air pressure rule
@georgekanulas9037 Рік тому
What if some of the excessive boost enters the cylinder at the exhaust cycle, as it would in a two stroke? That could help with the turbo lag
@rallyfanmx Рік тому
Hello Jason! Just one thought on that rule… what if teams were allowed to use different fuels for each race? Going from E10-20 to E30-35 would increase O2 intake, wouldn’t it? That would make this rule a good way to cap overall power. Also, some races (Mexico City) are more than 2k m asl. Wouldn’t more ethanol help engines here? As always, awesome videos. Thanks!
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
Fuel oxygen levels are set (as shown in video), so you can't go from E20 to E30.
@rallyfanmx Рік тому
@@EngineeringExplained Oh, now I get it. I thought the only restriction will be a minimum, but if it's going to be capped, it's a no go. Thanks for taking the time to answer!
@nerd_nato564 Рік тому
Teams only get a handful of fuels per year, iirc. I think Mercedes might've done a video on those.
@williamthebutcherssonprodu227 Рік тому
I think they are keeping the battery size the same will make energy management an even more important strategy for teams & drivers. Hopefully making it more entertaining for us fans
@wyskass861 Рік тому
Will be good for overtaking as well, for shorter burst of more torque or coming out of corners
@sephiros9883 Рік тому
Indeed. It should promote passing manoeuvres and defence. It’s a great idea. I don’t know if they are getting rid of drs in the new regs?
@wyskass861 Рік тому
@@sephiros9883 I never liked the DRS, which seemed too contrived, and hope they will get rid of it eventually.
@mrvwbug4423 Рік тому
Higher regenerative rate means they will refill that battery quicker between straights
@tedferkin Рік тому
@@mrvwbug4423 and then instantly use it. So the more they can recover and reuse the energy, the more horse power they will have. rather than using it just to boost on the longer straights, it will mean they can keep firing at any opportunity they get. The only thing I don't know about the regulations is if it has to be under driver control, or it can be automatically triggered by the engine management system
@brianb-p6586 2 місяці тому
Great analysis. I was surprised that there was no mention of the wild discharge and charge rates of the battery, relative to its capacity. Can the battery really do that, or is the 350 kW limit rule effectively irrelevant (at least for more than a second or two) due to the physical limitations of the battery?
@Simon-xu1qt 9 місяців тому
I think the air flow limit is to stop the engines blowing too much air through the valves when off throttle. Not for blown aerodynamics as such but because they are going to be fuel dumping
@engineer_cat Рік тому
I don't think the intention is to limit the air mass flow rate. I'd guess that they are separately limiting (a) boost pressure, to stop teams cranking the boost WAY up - possibly for safety/reliability reasons? - and (b) intercooler performance - probably to try to head off an arms race of bigger/more complex cooling systems for marginal gains in charge air density. Now yes, those two together do impose a de facto limit on mass flow rate at the intake, but as you say that limit would give very lean combustion, and no-one's likely to hit it.
@joashparker8271 11 місяців тому
I came looking for this. I definitely think that they are supposed to be separate constraints.
@arbiter1 9 місяців тому
yea cause if they can get away with super lean running engine then they will crank the boost of to as much as they can get away with. Try to limit max power to keep things some what level cause teams with unlimited would def explore an engine that can take a lot of boost and almost no fuel.
@Jacob-W-5570 Рік тому
I was a bit confused, how wouldn't you be able to reduce your charge air temp to 10 degrees above intake temperature. I do that all the time. Then I remembered I work with marine diesels. and our air cooler doesnt do air to air. it does air to seawater, which is usually way cooler then the air in the engineroom what the engine is taking in. usually we have it set to 45 C as charge air temp, regardless of the intake temperature. Keeping everything constant is most important for those big diesels. About F1 I wish they'd give the teams more freedom in the engine design and development. even the choosing of the number of cylinders, from a I4 to a v12, what ever you like. only limit: fuel, supplied by the organiser, in a known quantity. here you have 50L, and the lights are off and goo.
@EngineeringExplained Рік тому
I'm with you on opening up engine flexibility. It'd be fun to see different strategies there, and just limit teams to fuel flow.
@sephiros9883 Рік тому
I would like more flexibility too, however it’s so expensive to develop engines now that it would give too much of an advantage to the successful design until everyone copies it. F1 is going to become more and more a spec series with cost caps and everything, which in the end might give us a better show.
@Smitsva 11 місяців тому
Does it have to do with using the engine as an air compressor in the corners like in the times with the "blown diffusor" ??
@paramvir27 10 місяців тому
Awesome - danke
@brbhave2p00p4 Рік тому
Just take me back to F1 2004, the cars used to look better as well
@badass6300 Рік тому
My thoughts exactly.
@sailor_seller Рік тому
back to the time when cars were considerably slower?
@MrBubblebananas Рік тому
@@sailor_seller you do realize some of the old V10s still hold lap records, and that's on grooved tyres.
@poguemahone5476 Рік тому
@@sailor_seller yes, and considerably more entertaining
@robsmith6093 Рік тому
@SL they were slower not because of the engine it was the cars, put the old engines in the new cars and f1 will return to glory
@quittessa1409 Рік тому
My best guess is that they're putting an air limit on as a way to prevent any tricks the teams find to get higher fuel flow into the engine by tying the rules into knots
@user-qx4bp5rf3n Рік тому
*Looks at Ferrari*
@ssidewayz 5 місяців тому
@EngineeringExplained Are their any specifics around using an Interchiller system on this new gen 2026 regs? You would be able to claw back a lot of power loss by running an interchiller system which would give you low consistent Air intake temps
@khricisak 7 місяців тому
Just a thought for the new rule limiting air intake condition: Without MGK-H in place, the teams could introduce a pneumatic accumulator to recover some of the energy wasted at turbos. Hence rule to limit that 'air battery'?
@tomcorniche3844 Рік тому
Is there any way to use an electric motor connected to a vertical pole with a pickup strip at the top. The track could be metal with a negative charge & the vertical pole could pick up from an overhead mesh with a positive connection. I seem to remember this setup at out local town fair. Thoughts?
@vaughn1804 Рік тому
lol
@wyskass861 Рік тому
Sounds more like a train
@konekillerking Рік тому
Love the bumper car idea. Many F1 fans may be too young to get it. Ah, the smell of ozone in the air. And besides, the drivers already play bumper cars at all of the starts.
@avsystem3142 Рік тому
Electric induction coils in the operating surface to supply electrical power to vehicles would be more suitable, both for bumper cars and F1.
@ludwig980 Рік тому
About the absolute pressure limit, my interpretation would be along these lines: you made your calculation with the airflow generated at 10500 rpm, and most likely running that boost pressure at those rpm would be useless because the mixture would be too lean as you pointed out… but at lower rpm the airflow would be lower and maybe you could then use a higher MAP in the low rpm region to flatten out the power curve and have close to max power at all rpms? Would you consider this a possibility?
@Ninja98x Рік тому
I don't think so, because at lower RPM the fuel flow limit is also lower. For example at 8000 RPM you can't use as much fuel as you can at 10,500+ RPM, so if you already have quite a lot more air than you need at 10.5k, there's no benefit to having that much air at 8000 RPM with less fuel. You'll be even more lean than you'd be at max fuel flow, making it even further from optimal.
@FiveFiveZeroTwo 6 місяців тому
Why would the fuel flow limit be lower at lower RPMs? @@Ninja98x
@michaelguerin56 11 місяців тому
Thank you. Definitely some interesting super-secret combustion effects implied by those new limits. Watch this space?
@GilgaFrank 6 місяців тому
The discussion of battery deployment time assumes the driver only uses electrical power to accelerate down straights but it is also used in a series of small bursts to defend against a closing car. Having a third of the deployment time may be another effort by the FIA to increase overtaking.
@Angry_Squirrel555 Рік тому
Sure Leclerc took 22 seconds to complete the main straight at Baku, but you’re forgetting a crucial variable that is DRS. That alone lasts about a third of that main straight.
@aaawac2174 Місяць тому
So some math based off of Leclerc's 20 straight, assuming they come out of 16 at 100kph, it'll take ~8.5s to hit 300kph, allowing that 350kw then they will have another ~6s of battery left at 150kw. The last 5s of the straight away, the cars will be slowing down immensely even with DRS. So the idea of these hard on the break lunges will disappear on straightes like that.
@nobbynobody4902 Рік тому
The engine can be used as an air pump to enhance performance of other aerodynamic surfaces; see 'blown diffuser'. This may be to limit that so the exhaust outlet can be moved in future.
@carljaekle Рік тому
Compound turbo charging, ultimately led to gas turbines, and jet engines.
@tbssen36 Рік тому
Does the limit to the air fuel ratio have anything to do with preventing the teams from using the car's exhaust to create downforce or otherwise affect the aero of the car when not accelerating like they have done in the past?
@julianbailey2749 11 місяців тому
I wonder if the air flow limit is not so much to do with the combustion chamber as what happens at the exhaust outlet and how that air feeds into the rear aerodynamics of the car.
@benigo15 Рік тому
Could the airflow limit stop teams from making power much lower in the rev range? For example, if the engine is only spinning at 5000rpm at times then the airflow limit will stop them from going leaner than 1.4 or even 1.2 with the higher air temps you mentioned and that does seem like a limit teams might bump into.
@evoluke1069 Рік тому
They're already limited to less energy flow rate of fuel at lower rpms as per the purple graph in the video so I don't think that's it either, good idea tho
@moldytexas Рік тому
I wonder if these changes will be making the 2026 cars quite a chunk slower. Of course we have no idea about the potential new aero, but history has shown they haven't ever been changed for better. A lesser time of electric deployment, a lesser amount of power from the ICE with a possible torque output delay, not changing the RPM of the engine (although as I am aware, and I might be wrong as well, there are provisions to take it up to 15K, as it is right now). I wonder what the difference would be like in a case like this, where about 3-times the e-motor power gets delivered in 1/3rd of the time; how would that pan out in the time it takes to cover a certain distance on a track. The math could be worth a shot. I had done a deep dive into the new regs myself previously but didn't run the numbers, and boy am I shocked now! I am of the opinion that with the extremely painful elimination of the MGU-H, the engines will now sound better, even more so if the supposed exhaust system tweaks are brought into place.
@haukikannel Рік тому
The more power from electrick motors can actually make acceleration much better and so the lap times can actually go better. But lets see!
@Clangokkuner 10 місяців тому
@@haukikannelsure, until they run out of battery and then slow to a crawl since they have zero ICE power.
@jerehada 2 місяці тому
Superb...
@DoctorTauri 11 місяців тому
9:00 I see why you use Baku but I think the new Vegas GP will be more brutal with the MGU-K
@nunyabusiness2127 Рік тому
Great explanation dude! Thank you for breaking it down like this. I am old AF and have been watching F1 since the 70's. It has been amazing to watch the transformation of both the sport and the cars during the last 40 years. While I do miss the turbo era greatly (and the the engines screaming out 18K RPMS), I also have tremendous respect for the amount of power the engineers can pull out of these engines with relatively tiny displacement. Just incredible. As for understanding the third change...it's F1. Need I say more. ;-)
@serralvo26 Рік тому
30 years ago was this same tiny displacement and this level of power, or even more power. The bigger difence is that today they use halt of the fuel at that era.
@realMaverickBuckley 11 місяців тому
Me too. Let's be honest, F1 has been taken over Elitest Green buffoons and by hyper marketing to 16 Yr old children. The current cars are significantly slower than the 2004 cars. 20 years and we've done is go backwards. It's boring.
@JohnLawley24v 10 місяців тому
@@realMaverickBuckley except they're both faster and more efficeint then the 2004 cars...and the 2020/2021 cars where faster than these...
@JohnLawley24v 10 місяців тому
the 80s turbos didn't hit 18k rpm, that was mid 2000s NA engines.
@blueblade455 Рік тому
Bottom line is that environmentalists now getting a stranglehold hold on fuel burning race car engines. Sad times!
@jaymckoskey25 Рік тому
From my experience I expect the octane, boost and temperature rules are meaningful constraints that the teams will take to the limits. The in-cylinder air temperature and pressure are of ultimate importance, not manifold, but "excess" manifold pressure and low temperature is very useful for optimizing the in-cylinder conditions. For best thermal efficiency and knock avoidance the in-cylinder objectives would be minimum temperature and maybe lambda 1.2 - 1.4 as a guess. Intake runners tuned for adiabatic expansion (rather than compression as would be usual) can efficiently reduce in-cylinder pressure and temperature to well below manifold conditions. The penalty is the additional exhaust enthalpy required but this is a favorable trade in the context of a very efficient engine, turbine, compressor and CAC. An engine tuned for the same trapped air mass but at a lower boost level would have a higher in-cylinder temperature and thus worse knock resistance and thermal efficiency.
@MrHaggyy 2 місяці тому
There was always some sort of air-intake limitation. Usually by an intake choke that every team had to run and was provided by the FIA(McLaren). I know they run prechamber ignition with a lambda close to one into the main piston chamber. Without a sort of exhaust gas recirculation like the MGU-H teams might choose to run more fresh air to get more mass providing similar pressure at lower temps. Which would mean oxygen in the exhaust which is odd. It could also be for areodynamic reasons as you can stall areodynamic components with the exhaust to a degree reducing downforce and drag at high speeds and engine load.
@luminescentlion 10 місяців тому
All of these comments are still forgetting that the most powerful engine in F1 history was a 4 cylinder.
@star9732 Рік тому
I want to see what’s possible with no limits. Just perhaps size and weight.
@tedferkin Рік тому
Williams did that a number of years ago. It was insane, and undriveable. Literally the driver wouldn't be able to cope with the forces on his/her body. Given further advancements now, I've no idea what it would be. But removing the rules is pointless, the racing is about comparable cars. Hence the name "Formula 1". this is racing of cars in that category.
@GTFour Рік тому
RedBull X car in Gran Turismo is this
@star9732 Рік тому
@@tedferkin Formula one is notorious for neutering the cars. So many innovations get stymied. I want formula unlimited. The drivers know very well what they would be signing up for. Lets see 500 kph
@nathanzondlo7393 Рік тому
What's possible is drivers more often losing grip and slamming into walls.
@SuperSpruce Рік тому
@@tedferkin Then allow teams to make the cars autonomous.
@lochlinrecht1427 Рік тому
It'll be really cool if you could walk through this stuff with somebody that works at same Mercedes or F1 itself. With the media direction they're going in they would probably be open to that sort of thing.
@Raziel_SSJ 11 місяців тому
As always, very interesting analysis. I can't help thinking that all of this is mainly for ecological reasons and to force manufacturers to research toward more "fuel" efficient combustion engines rather than "power" efficient, even if they are two ends of the same rope.
Engineering Explained
Переглядів 430 тис.
Engineering Explained
Переглядів 735 тис.
Nersva
Переглядів 1,6 млн