F1 turbo technology. Will we ever see it?
08-24-2014, 11:53 AM
#1
F1 turbo technology. Will we ever see it? F1 (Mercedes) split the turbine and compressor with a long shaft through the engine. Just think only having the turbine section on the exhaust area for tight packaging and the compressor up front of the crank pulley. Aftermarket would just produce shaft lengths in 1/2" increments.
Getting the cooling effect just splitting them is a bonus. Setups could be larger with this tech. Turbine side would use engine oil but the compressor side would be self contained.
What do you all think?
http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/com...ercedes_split/
Getting the cooling effect just splitting them is a bonus. Setups could be larger with this tech. Turbine side would use engine oil but the compressor side would be self contained.
What do you all think?
http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/com...ercedes_split/
Last edited by Z06PSI; 08-24-2014 at 12:34 PM.
08-24-2014, 12:08 PM
#2
9 Second Club
Many elements will spill down eventually...
When cost permits.
Fairly amazing they can get a long shaft to withstand turbo speeds, must be well supported along it's length.
But a very novel idea....but as a lot seems to be aimed at packaging constraints too, hard to imagine it would ever be a value for money approach for more mundane cars.
When cost permits.
Fairly amazing they can get a long shaft to withstand turbo speeds, must be well supported along it's length.
But a very novel idea....but as a lot seems to be aimed at packaging constraints too, hard to imagine it would ever be a value for money approach for more mundane cars.
08-24-2014, 01:28 PM
#4
Many elements will spill down eventually...
When cost permits.
Fairly amazing they can get a long shaft to withstand turbo speeds, must be well supported along it's length.
But a very novel idea....but as a lot seems to be aimed at packaging constraints too, hard to imagine it would ever be a value for money approach for more mundane cars.
When cost permits.
Fairly amazing they can get a long shaft to withstand turbo speeds, must be well supported along it's length.
But a very novel idea....but as a lot seems to be aimed at packaging constraints too, hard to imagine it would ever be a value for money approach for more mundane cars.
08-24-2014, 02:10 PM
#5
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
I really don't think the long shaft is an issue. We use jack shafts now for roots/screw systems now and the torque on those is considerably higher. There is hardly any torque on a turbo shaft at speed. Seals I do not think would be a problem with today's tech. Application would be the biggest and supporting each end. However only having one side on the exhaust would be lighter then today's way. Both ends would either have to be supported by the motor or both not with a flex joint on the exhaust side.
Andrew
08-24-2014, 05:40 PM
#6
9 Second Club
08-24-2014, 08:18 PM
#8
9 Second Club
Exactly the same as with a driveshaft.
The longer the shaft, the lower the critical speed before it wants to self destruct.
Now if the shaft is supported on multiple bearings along it's length, then effectively it becomes lots of short shafts with a higher critical speed.
If you imagine trying to spin a flag pole, it will flex and whip violently at a fairly low rpm. That's an extreme example, but the same applies to any shaft.
The longer the shaft, the lower the critical speed before it wants to self destruct.
Now if the shaft is supported on multiple bearings along it's length, then effectively it becomes lots of short shafts with a higher critical speed.
If you imagine trying to spin a flag pole, it will flex and whip violently at a fairly low rpm. That's an extreme example, but the same applies to any shaft.
08-24-2014, 08:35 PM
#9
So it needs to be supported like a torque tube on a Vette? Total from shaft tip to shaft tip might at the longest be 36". From the back of the LS engine to the front and then an additional 6" or so to get it in front of the crankshaft. I just think the benefits are huge for a lot of people in the community. Your journals need to be bigger but that would be fine as that would help with heat dissipation. I wonder if the F1 units are built in house?
08-24-2014, 11:59 PM
#10
Teching In
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No place for this in a normal car. You will end up with a 30 inch long turbo with nowhere to mount it. The turbo would cost 20 grand because of the balancing and exotic materials. Most people are trying to move their engines back as far as possible towards the firewall, then where does the exhaust turbine go? This was engineered with a very specific purpose that I don't see ever being available or useful for the aftermarket. Pretty cool though.
08-25-2014, 12:18 AM
#11
No place for this in a normal car. You will end up with a 30 inch long turbo with nowhere to mount it. The turbo would cost 20 grand because of the balancing and exotic materials. Most people are trying to move their engines back as far as possible towards the firewall, then where does the exhaust turbine go? This was engineered with a very specific purpose that I don't see ever being available or useful for the aftermarket. Pretty cool though.
08-25-2014, 02:20 AM
#12
What a load of crap! The reason they have done this is one reason only. Packaging! Lower compressor temps? Really? How much heat is transferred across to the compressor from the turbine? Not a lot from what I understand.
The reason they have added this extra weight of the shaft is to tighter package the gearbox and rear of the engine. They would probably have to run pretty large engine to gearbox spacer and now they can get rid of that and mount the gears as close to the engine as possible.
As for shorter pipe runs you are talking cms different, and probably only a couple of ltrs difference in volume at most. So the lag comment is rubbish.
Absolutely no reason to do this on a road car. You simply need to redesign the area around the turbo to ensure you have sufficet space and it can take the temperature.
No if you want to talk about the turbos KURS system I'm all ears.
The reason they have added this extra weight of the shaft is to tighter package the gearbox and rear of the engine. They would probably have to run pretty large engine to gearbox spacer and now they can get rid of that and mount the gears as close to the engine as possible.
As for shorter pipe runs you are talking cms different, and probably only a couple of ltrs difference in volume at most. So the lag comment is rubbish.
Absolutely no reason to do this on a road car. You simply need to redesign the area around the turbo to ensure you have sufficet space and it can take the temperature.
No if you want to talk about the turbos KURS system I'm all ears.