Back in November, F1 got everyone together to lay out a first draft of proposed rules
for the next generation of engines due to come into play in 2021.
The idea was to put these proposals before the FIA, the teams, the fans and – possibly
most importantly – a bunch of car manufacturers who may be interested in joining the competition
should the engine formula be to their liking.
As you probably know by now if you’ve been watching my videos the current F1 engine parameters
consist of: A 1.6 litre V6 single-turbo hybrid with an
MGU-H capturing heat energy, and MGU-K capturing kinetic energy.120 K
There is a prescribed fuel flow limit (100kg/h), a limit on how much energy can be absorbed
by the MGU-K, and a limit on how much power the battery can delivered to the wheels.
Naturally, as technology moves on we expect the rules to be revised to try and keep F1
engines powerful, efficient, affordable and relevant.
As much as some people would like to go back to V12 petrol-guzzling monsters, that’s
not going to happen because frankly those are just bad engines in today’s world and
don’t make sense anymore.
It’s a little bit hipster to me – like using an old rotary phone because you like
the way it clicks and whirrs.
Each to their own I guess!
Anyway, the new proposals.
Here’s what the first draft looks like for our consideration:
The 2021 power unit to be a 1.6 Litre, V6 Turbo Hybrid
3000rpm higher engine running speed range to improve the sound
Prescriptive internal design parameters to restrict development costs and discourage
extreme designs and running conditions Removal of the MGU-H
More powerful MGU-K with focus on manual driver deployment in race together with option to
save up energy over several laps to give a driver controlled tactical element to racing
Single turbo with dimensional constraints and weight limits
Standard energy store and control electronics High Level of external prescriptive design
to give 'Plug-And-Play' engine/chassis/transmission swap capability
Intention to investigate tighter fuel regulations and limits on number of fuels used
We need to understand what F1 is trying to achieve with these ideas and it’s not just
bringing F1 back to the glory days of the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s or whenever you grew up
with F1.
It’s mostly about trying to keep F1 moving forward without tripping over its own shoelaces.
They want to: Keep costs down so all teams, manufacturer-based
or privateer, can afford their engines for the season
Keep engines relevant to the real world.
We may say F1 isn’t the real world so should be able to do whatever they want, but most
engine manufacturers just aren’t interested in old-school engines.
F1 wants to be attractive to Audi, Porsche, Ford, Toyota, etc…
Make engines as exciting as they can be within these parameters.
Fans seem to want them loud and angry, so how can we keep that going a little longer.
We might also be able to use the parameters of the engines to affect the on track racing.
So let’s break these down then.
Keeping the 1.6 Litre, V6 Turbo Hybrid This is the same base power unit quality as
we have now.
Everyone seems happy that this size of engine, with the turbo and hybrid systems can produce
the right amounts of power at the right efficiency.
Also, it will cost a LOT to scrap everything and change this fundamental basis of the power
unit.
Allowing – no, encouraging – the cars to rev higher
This is an aesthetic touch as promoters have been worried about the quieter growl of the
V6 engines compared to the loud screams of the previous V8 and V10 engines.
The maximum fuel flow allowance will be increased too to allow for these extra revs, pushing
the high-end of the engine speed from around 12000 rpm to 15000 rpm.
Still short of the 20000 rpm being pulled back in 2004 but it’s something.
Personally, I'm not all that concerned about the engine noise.
Partly because the main audience (the TV audience) gets used to it very quickly, partly because
– especially when you’re at the track – the screams of the engines actually make
it very tricky to hear anything else, and partly because the sound of a combustion engine
will disappear altogether one day so we might as well slide into it gently.
That’s just me though.
I know a lot of people are very attached to loud, screamy F1 cars and this is a compromise.
This rule basically is far more strict about how and where you can develop your power unit
This is a no brainer.
As with all components of the car, this is a move to restrict wildly unconstrained design
and development of every part of the car.
By boxing engine parts in to certain parameters, teams won't be able to spend crazy amount
of time and money on wild solutions across all parts of the engine.
In theory it will also prevent teams from finding solutions that open up exotic areas
of development and force a bizarre and expensive arms races.
This is the engine equivalent of the bodywork rules that came in for 2009 that put a stop
to the increasingly eccentric development of winglets, aerofoils and flickups that were
appearing all over the cars through the 2000s.
Note that this rule proposal actually has no specific ideas.
It just states the intention to close off some areas of development once they figure
out what those might be.
A more powerful MGU-K, with a manual energy deployment button and the option to save up
charged energy over many laps So the MGUK unit will be much more powerful,
providing an even bigger boost of electrical energy deployed into the power of the car.
This is inevitable and every new change in engine formula will give even more power to
the electrical part of the engine as technology rises to meet demand.
Again, no specifics on how MUCH power the MGUK will deploy - they'll work that out by
what they expect from the technology growth over the next 3 years.
The current MGU-K is ten times more powerful than the KERS unit that came before it but
I certainly don’t expect as big a leap this time!
Most interestingly, the proposal suggests going back to a KERS style manual deployment.
The first time KERS was introduced in 2009 - 2013, it was activated by the driver as
and when they needed it via a kind of ‘boost button’.
When the hybrid engines came into use, the deployment of electric power was automated
by the software, much like in a hybrid road car.
The computer inside the car decided when it was best to use which combination of electric
and combustion power.
When button-activated KERS was last used, only a certain, very very limited, amount
of stored energy could be used per lap.
The new rules would allow drivers to store energy over many laps to spring an ultra-boost
surprise if needed.
Unlike DRS, which is sometimes viewed as a push-to-pass system which ben ds the spirit
of competition, this stored-boost is available to both a chasing and defending car, so deciding
how and when to store and deploy will be part of the new tactics of racing.
It will still allow a chasing car to have a power advantage over the car in front, but
only if played correctly.
Expect some feints and dummies being played here.
Removal of the MGU-H Now, this is kind of a shame for engine futurists
like me.
It was proposed in the name of simplicity and cost.
Don't forget - part of the thinking behind these rules was to remove barriers to entry
for new engine manufacturers, so they worked to make the engines simpler than they are
now.
But ALSO, the MGU-H was removed to try and make the cars louder as they dampen the engine
noise.
Unfortunately, this will also make the cars much less efficient.
The MGUH absorbed heat energy from the turbo to charge the battery – energy which could
then be redeployed into the car’s driving power.
Removing this element will remove a major source of power for the car.
One thing to note - the MGUH has often been used to keep the turbocharger energised to
prevent turbo lag on acceleration.
With it removed, the MGUK (KERS) deployment may often be used to fill this gap.
We'll have to see if this is the case, if these rules stand.
Speculation isn't always accurate - some people speculated that the new-for-2014 hybrids would
use electric-only power through slow corners, but that didn't come to pass.
Single turbo with constraints AND standard energy store and control electronics
Again, this is a bit of a no brainer.
Constrain what a turbo can be and how you can development to keep things simple and
cheap.
Also, give everyone a standard third party battery and control electronics as there’s
very little point spending resources trying to out develop each other in these areas.
Plug-and-play engine designs This is long-overdue.
Currently if a team wants to swap engine or gearbox suppliers they have a massive headache
because the parts of the engine that connect it to the rest of the car are different for
every manufacturer.
McLaren will have been working for a long time with Renault, for example, to redesign
a lot of their power train to get the Renault power unit to fit.
This rule essentially forcing standard connections between elements of the power units so that
teams can swap engines easily between seasons without having to massively redesign parts
of their car to accommodate these new engines and parts.
It also means customer teams can pick and choose engine and transmission (gearbox) suppliers
as everything will still fit.
This of this like laptops and devices having standardised USB ports so you can easily change
different devices and they'll still plug into each other easily and you don't have to change
your laptop or buy lots of awkward and expensive converters to make everything work.
Just plug-and-play, as it says.
The intention to investigate tighter fuel regulations and limits on number of fuels
used Little details were given here, but I expect
(similarly to a lot of the rules proposed) the idea here is to stop over-development
at high costs and used of exotic materials and chemistry in fuels.
There's a balance here, of course, in trying to find fuels that are maximally efficient
and perhaps cleaner which doesn’t require continued development.
Hence why the note here is just to 'investigate it'.
So these are the list of proposals as they stand.
You may support or reject a lot of these ideas depending on what your philosophy is on F1,
engineering and competition.
One thing I noticed in the comments to my 2018 Power Unit rules round-up video was that
people tended to hate the ‘engine conservation’ element that had crept into F1, with the despair
that drivers will be forced to nurse their engines instead of going full welly as they
only have a certain number of units for the year.
This is certainly something to be concerned about when making the rules, but bear in mind
that the rules are designed within the parameters of expected engineering skill of the time.
This means that the FIA will unlikely rubber-stamp a ruleset that says “you must use 3 engines
in a year” if it doesn’t think engineers can figure out how to make an engine both
last for seven races AND be used to near-full capability.
I believe it is the intention to have fast, full-throttle competition while not blowing
through 50 engines a year and we are at a stage in power unit technology where this
is increasingly possible.
I’m not overly concerned about engine conservation rules, even if we have a few hiccups along
the way (I do think we aren’t quite at the level the rules demand, but I’m optimistic!).
We also need to bear in mind at all times that we are in the middle of the long era
where petrol engines are being phased out.
Each stage of engine rules will reflect this and attempt to find a way to introduce lighter
reliance on combustion energy and heavier reliance on electrical energy.
I’m excited for this transition period.
F1 has always been about change, development and progress.
Seeing how engineers meet this challenge will be
something
to behold.