I don’t know what it is about component failures but we engineers tend to find them fascinating. We may have designed and produced the most elegant piece of hardware, but it’s somehow only when it fails - and the more catastrophically the better - that we sit up and take note.
Sometimes it isn’t the fault of the component but perhaps the environment into which it was placed. Sometimes it may have worked well in engines over many Read more…
Energy recovery, based on the capture, storage and re-use of braking energy is not new in motorsport, and several series had pioneered the technology before Formula One embraced it and called it KERS - and then let go fairly quickly before embracing it again for 2011! Whatever the method of storage and redeployment of energy though, the aims are the same: either more power and a quicker lap time, or the same lap time with greater fuel conversion efficiency. Greater efficiency is in keeping with the aims of both the motor industry and various governments.
In my past three articles on heads-blocks, I took a closer look at cylinder head loading. The main focus has been on the thermal loads of the cylinder head and which parameters of its design are of most influence in preventing it from cracking due to the thermal loading - so-called ‘thermo-mechanical fatigue’.
Now don’t get me wrong, I like to think of myself as open to new ideas and suggestions as the next man, and indeed throughout my working life the programmes and projects I have been associated with would at least demonstrate that fact. But if you had told me even 10 years ago that a diesel engine would be used to win the 24 Hours of Le Mans every year from 2006 then I am sure I would have taken some convincing.
When we look at bespoke engine studs, which are generally designed in such a way that engineering is given far more thought than cost, many of them will have a larger diameter and coarser thread at the ‘metal end’ - the end installed in the casting. Studs for mass production very often carry the same thread at both ends, or have a continuous thread over the whole length of the fastener.
At present, exhausts occupy a strange position in Formula One engine development and are treated very differently in the regulations from most components that make up these highly specialised engines.
I don’t know about you but I am continually amazed at the power of modern electronic components. Invariably integrated with some form of digital microprocessor, the speeds and in many cases capacity to store information is something truly to marvel.
As a power unit engineer I must admit I still think in terms of engine dynos. In absorbing the power produced directly off the engine crankshaft - or, perhaps better still, a suitably designed PTO (Power Take Off) - this seems to me the easiest way to map an engine and optimise its performance. But as a pragmatist, I realise there are times when the engine may need to be tested in its environment, and in such cases it is much simpler and quicker to leave it in the vehicle.
The reasons why we might want to augment the moment caused by the counterweight by using a dense material are well understood and, in previous RET-Monitor articles, some of the methods by which we can add ‘heavy metal’ to crankshaft counterweights have been discussed. In this article I want to discuss the method that is generally held to be the most effective - adding tungsten. Happily, it can also prove to be one of the cheaper methods, especially when judged by the criterion of most additional moment per unit of expenditure.
At the recent Autosport Show in England there was a lot to interest the motorsports enthusiast, but during the two trade days preceding the public show days, there is a simultaneous show, Autosport Engineering, where the latest developments in motorsports components are shown, manufacturing technologies are highlighted and much new technology is discussed. Many specialist engine component manufacturers from Europe and the US are represented here. 
