F-1 Cylinder Head Design

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Kevin Johnson
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 9365
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:41 am
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by Kevin Johnson »

Honda has papers available on their F1 work. You need to sign up. For example the paper below describes the hollow connecting rods. Have fun. https://www.hondarandd.jp
Development of Reciprocating Parts and Crankshaft in Honda’s Third Formula One Era
Article of Honda R&D Technical Review F1 Special (The third Era Activities)


Summary
Reciprocating parts and crankshafts for race use must display reliability and achieve low friction levels. Increasing engine speed is an effective method of increasing the power of natural aspiration engines, and Honda increased engine speed to 19,600 rpm in 2006, prior to the introduction of upper limits for engine speed. In 2005, Formula One regulations were changed to increase the distance for which engines would be used from one race event (400 km) to continuous use for two race events (1,500 km). In order to balance performance under severe use conditions with the achievement of reduced friction, the shapes, materials, and manufacturing methods used for the reciprocating parts and crankshaft were modified to reduce weight and increase strength and stiffness. In FY2008, the weight of the reciprocating parts was reduced to 358 g, representing a weight saving of 41 g against the FY2000 figure of 399 g. This paper will discuss the development process, focusing on each component part.
Driving Force Online: BREAKING NEWS—Ohio Governor Signs SEMA-Supported Vehicle Freedom Bill Into Law!
Kevin Johnson
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 9365
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:41 am
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by Kevin Johnson »

GARY C wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:39 pm
Kevin Johnson wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:57 pm I remember the first mention and then the epic thread:

https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtop ... 10#p530618

https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtop ... 10#p530671
From everything I have read on the subject I would have to agree that if it shows a power increase then chances are the runner was to big to begin with, a purpose built engine like F1 or NASCAR or even a well sorted out traditional build would probably see little to no benefit or possibly even hurt power due to the runner being sized accordingly and the high air speed keeping the fuel better atomized.

With an F1 engine idling around 7000 rpm there probably isn't a lot of fuel puddling. :)
See Figure 13. Paper available on the Honda site:
Development of Induction and Exhaust Systems for Third-Era Honda Formula One Engines
Article of Honda R&D Technical Review F1 Special (The third Era Activities)


Summary
Induction and exhaust systems determine the amount of air intake supplied to the engine, and as such are critical elements affecting engine output.
In addition, the layout of the induction and exhaust systems affects the vehicle’s aerodynamic performance, and so it must be considered together with vehicle development.
At first, there were few CAE software and computer resources available, and induction and exhaust system components were produced by measurement and guesswork so that development was largely performed on a trial and error basis, but in recent years, the 3D-CAD and CAE software has advanced so quickly, and computer resources have expanded so much, that development is done by simulation.
The enhanced phenomenon elucidation and forecast precision have made it possible to shorten the time it takes to determine specifications and reduce development costs.
Driving Force Online: BREAKING NEWS—Ohio Governor Signs SEMA-Supported Vehicle Freedom Bill Into Law!
hoffman900
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 3445
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by hoffman900 »

GARY C wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:39 pm
Kevin Johnson wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:57 pm I remember the first mention and then the epic thread:

https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtop ... 10#p530618

https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtop ... 10#p530671
From everything I have read on the subject I would have to agree that if it shows a power increase then chances are the runner was to big to begin with, a purpose built engine like F1 or NASCAR or even a well sorted out traditional build would probably see little to no benefit or possibly even hurt power due to the runner being sized accordingly and the high air speed keeping the fuel better atomized.

With an F1 engine idling around 7000 rpm there probably isn't a lot of fuel puddling. :)
Disagree. Airspeed is airspeed. A port that might choke at 18,000 rpm is going to have low velocity at 7,000rpm. The same rules apply.

They actually discuss wetting on the port walls. They used fuel with dye in it to stain the ports and CFD. They did not fix it by texturing ;)
-Bob
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by GARY C »

hoffman900 wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:27 am
GARY C wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:39 pm
Kevin Johnson wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:57 pm I remember the first mention and then the epic thread:

https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtop ... 10#p530618

https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtop ... 10#p530671
From everything I have read on the subject I would have to agree that if it shows a power increase then chances are the runner was to big to begin with, a purpose built engine like F1 or NASCAR or even a well sorted out traditional build would probably see little to no benefit or possibly even hurt power due to the runner being sized accordingly and the high air speed keeping the fuel better atomized.

With an F1 engine idling around 7000 rpm there probably isn't a lot of fuel puddling. :)
Disagree. Airspeed is airspeed. A port that might choke at 18,000 rpm is going to have low velocity at 7,000rpm. The same rules apply.

They actually discuss wetting on the port walls. They used fuel with dye in it to stain the ports and CFD. They did not fix it by texturing ;)
That was kind of a joke.
Does anyone know if F1, NASCAR or Pro Stock has ever tested port texture and if they did do you think they would tell anyone?
Just curious if any at that level have given their take on it.

In the days of the 740 hp NASCAR engine I know they were using directional texture called riblets, they have also been known to use a sort of vortex generator on restricter plate engines back in the day.

I try not to conclude that something is useless just because it's not being used by someone else.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5482
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by mk e »

hoffman900 wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:27 am
Disagree. Airspeed is airspeed. A port that might choke at 18,000 rpm is going to have low velocity at 7,000rpm. The same rules apply.

They actually discuss wetting on the port walls. They used fuel with dye in it to stain the ports and CFD. They did not fix it by texturing ;)
I remember readign that back in the 18k-19k days those engine didn't run below 4500 and needed at least 6000 to make the car move without stalling so the air speed thing is probably right.

....but the ports are basically straight up so itsalso true that they probably don't have a fuel puddling issue at any rpm. This might be the key point. With straight down ports you can be pretty sure what is strayed goes in each cycle, droplet are somewhat uniform and mixture stable. Add horizonal sections and you have larger drops forming and rolling along the bottom dropping into the cylinder somewhat ramdomly which will play havoc with mixture.....a finish rough enough to grab the droplets and hold them until they vaporize might fix it and yield more hp even though it flows a bit less air.

Just a guess but I suspect port/runner shape is the big player for port finish not air speed.
Mark
Mechanical Engineer
mekilljoydammit
Member
Member
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 6:40 pm
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by mekilljoydammit »

I recall reading that the driver for the high idle speed is more about having enough of an oil wedge on the cam/follower interface than anything else. I know multivalve and pneumatic valve return lets you get away with a lot but 16mm lift and 270 degrees @1mm duration (260ish @0.050") is on the aggressive side for multivalve.
mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5482
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by mk e »

That's probably true too...but I suspsect it all goes together becasue why design an oil system to work at an rpm too low for the engine to even run?
Mark
Mechanical Engineer
Ron E
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: nc

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by Ron E »

GARY C wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 6:28 amng ;)
That was kind of a joke.
Does anyone know if F1, NASCAR or Pro Stock has ever tested port texture and if they did do you think they would tell anyone?
Just curious if any at that level have given their take on it.




All I'm aware of is long-side bowl texturing on a allky F/C. The person shared nothing more than "It helps some" Of course, those are blown and the charge is very wet. I suspect like Mark said the port shape is a big deal

.
nitro2
Vendor
Posts: 2392
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 12:38 am
Location:
Contact:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by nitro2 »

Many years ago we used a very, very aggressive "texturing" on the intake for a very wet fuel, worked wonders.

Never tried it with race gas or methanol though. It's on the To Do List but way down that list because the chances of it also working wonders with race gas or methanol are deemed to be slim, but like many things you never really know with absolute certainty until you try it. Thinking out of the box is one thing, doing out of the box is another. :)
High Speed Combustion Pressure Tuning Equipment
TFX Engine Technology Inc.
tfx.engine@yahoo.com
www.tfxengine.com
User avatar
MadBill
Guru
Guru
Posts: 15024
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:41 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by MadBill »

nitro2 wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:21 pm Many years ago we used a very, very aggressive "texturing" on the intake for a very wet fuel, worked wonders...
So, soapy low surface tension fuel? :-k
Along those lines, anyone know anything about the additive(s)/surfactant(s) used in military jet fuel to reduce friction and speed in-flight refueling?
Felix, qui potuit rerum cognscere causas.

Happy is he who can discover the cause of things.
mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5482
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by mk e »

MadBill wrote: Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:29 am
nitro2 wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:21 pm Many years ago we used a very, very aggressive "texturing" on the intake for a very wet fuel, worked wonders...
So, soapy low surface tension fuel? :-k
Along those lines, anyone know anything about the additive(s)/surfactant(s) used in military jet fuel to reduce friction and speed in-flight refueling?
Or switch to propane or CNG and be done with droplet issues.
Mark
Mechanical Engineer
gruntguru
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 7:56 pm
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by gruntguru »

With 50 bar fuel pressure (100 bar in later V8 and 500 bar in current DI V6) the droplets are pretty small.
digger
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2722
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 6:39 am
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by digger »

gruntguru wrote: Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:39 am With 50 bar fuel pressure (100 bar in later V8 and 500 bar in current DI V6) the droplets are pretty small.
Until it hits a wall
gruntguru
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 7:56 pm
Location:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by gruntguru »

Ah but the point is - the small the droplet, the better it follows the gas/behaves like a gas - and the gas doesn't hit the wall.
NORSK
Member
Member
Posts: 143
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Re: F-1 Cylinder Head Design

Post by NORSK »

GARY C wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 6:28 am
hoffman900 wrote: Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:27 am
GARY C wrote: Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:39 pm

From everything I have read on the subject I would have to agree that if it shows a power increase then chances are the runner was to big to begin with, a purpose built engine like F1 or NASCAR or even a well sorted out traditional build would probably see little to no benefit or possibly even hurt power due to the runner being sized accordingly and the high air speed keeping the fuel better atomized.

With an F1 engine idling around 7000 rpm there probably isn't a lot of fuel puddling. :)
Disagree. Airspeed is airspeed. A port that might choke at 18,000 rpm is going to have low velocity at 7,000rpm. The same rules apply.

They actually discuss wetting on the port walls. They used fuel with dye in it to stain the ports and CFD. They did not fix it by texturing ;)
That was kind of a joke.
Does anyone know if F1, NASCAR or Pro Stock has ever tested port texture and if they did do you think they would tell anyone?
Just curious if any at that level have given their take on it.

In the days of the 740 hp NASCAR engine I know they were using directional texture called riblets, they have also been known to use a sort of vortex generator on restricter plate engines back in the day.

I try not to conclude that something is useless just because it's not being used by someone else.
The length of the runner is so short in this F1 head,so i doubt the texture itself would make much difference,the injectors has extremely well atomization and high feed pressure also
Post Reply