Do you seriously believe that MHPE is delivering all power units equal?RicME85 wrote:What are Mercedes doing differently to Williams seeing as they have the same engine how can Massa be complaining or Merc trickery? Is it just a case of they know their tech better?
I still don't see that, yes 5.2.4 states that you can use a clutch to detach the MGU-H from the turbine, but 5.1.6 clearly states that compressor and turbine have to have the same RPM. 1 or 2 clutches between compressor and turbine would always breach rule 5.1.6xpensive wrote:It didn't, the 5.2.4 clutch was a loophole contradicting 5.1.6 when applied to a split-turbo, why the rules needed to be clarified.
Simple as that.
It states that they have to have the same rpm, but not when (i.e. "at all times")- and we all know that somthing which is unspecified cannot be inforced until it cannot be refuted.knabbel wrote:I still don't see that, yes 5.2.4 states that you can use a clutch to detach the MGU-H from the turbine, but 5.1.6 clearly states that compressor and turbine have to have the same RPM. 1 or 2 clutches between compressor and turbine would always breach rule 5.1.6xpensive wrote:It didn't, the 5.2.4 clutch was a loophole contradicting 5.1.6 when applied to a split-turbo, why the rules needed to be clarified.
Simple as that.
That said, I have not had my hands on a Mercedes F1 turbo so I can't say if there is a clutch or not. By the way Ferrari and some other teams have the MGU-H sandwiched between the turbine and compressor housing so technically they are also running a split turbo.
English is not my primary language but as it is formulated I think 'at all times' is implied in a modal way.CBeck113 wrote: It states that they have to have the same rpm, but not when (i.e. "at all times")- and we all know that somthing which is unspecified cannot be inforced until it cannot be refuted.
But IMO Mercedes is able to use the full power of the MGU-K for a longer percentage of the lap time.Cold Fussion wrote:You're allowed 4 MJ a lap from the ERS to the MGU-K, with the MGU-K being limited to 120 KW. There's no limit on energy transfer from the MGU-H to MGU-K, apart from the 120 KW limit of the MGU-K. Over a race distance I could imagine the Mercedes unit could have a substantial average power advantage, but I would have thought that over a single qualifying lap the 4 MJ limit would have been sufficient, but clearly it isn't.
They have too!xpensive wrote:Do you seriously believe that MHPE is delivering all power units equal?RicME85 wrote:What are Mercedes doing differently to Williams seeing as they have the same engine how can Massa be complaining or Merc trickery? Is it just a case of they know their tech better?
FIA wrote:2014 F1 Sporting Regulations
APPENDIX 4 POWER UNIT HOMOLOGATION
2. A manufacturer may homologate no more than one specification of power unit.
by that logic of yours 100kg/hr need not mean 28grams/secCBeck113 wrote:It is implied, I agree, but any decent engineer would need it written out before it is accepted as a limit. Look at it from this side: when you're at work you get paid to work, and your contract specifies how long you work, where you work, how long your lunch break can be, etc. Does it say how long you are allowed to go to the bathroom? So is it forbidden, since your contract says that you clock in and work until you clock out?
Mercedes, or any other team, can claim that a clutch is necessary in a certain situation, i.e. as xpensive stated above but due to reliability reasons. If Charlie say OK, then they're through.
So if I get a speeding ticket and just say "the sign didn't say 50 km/h was applicable all the time, it just said 50 km/h." you think that would hold up in court?? Otherwise what should the phrase "the turbine and compressor most rotate at the same angular velocity" apply to?? Only Wednesday afternoons between 14.36 and 16.22 ???CBeck113 wrote:It is implied, I agree, but any decent engineer would need it written out before it is accepted as a limit. Look at it from this side: when you're at work you get paid to work, and your contract specifies how long you work, where you work, how long your lunch break can be, etc. Does it say how long you are allowed to go to the bathroom? So is it forbidden, since your contract says that you clock in and work until you clock out?
Mercedes, or any other team, can claim that a clutch is necessary in a certain situation, i.e. as xpensive stated above but due to reliability reasons. If Charlie say OK, then they're through.
by anyones logic 100kg/hr shouldn't mean 28gr/sec, because one has the measurement done or calculated for a period 3600 times greater than the otherWilliamsF1 wrote:by that logic of yours 100kg/hr need not mean 28grams/secCBeck113 wrote:It is implied, I agree, but any decent engineer would need it written out before it is accepted as a limit. Look at it from this side: when you're at work you get paid to work, and your contract specifies how long you work, where you work, how long your lunch break can be, etc. Does it say how long you are allowed to go to the bathroom? So is it forbidden, since your contract says that you clock in and work until you clock out?
Mercedes, or any other team, can claim that a clutch is necessary in a certain situation, i.e. as xpensive stated above but due to reliability reasons. If Charlie say OK, then they're through.
