2012 Exhaust Blowing & Coanda

[Dragonfly]

Hi Kiril,
One thing I don't like because it seems as deliberately done by FIA is the ambiguity of the current exhaust rules. Had they formulated more straight cut rules, bringing the exhaust exit to a place where the effect of the exhaust gasses would be minimal teams would be able to run their optimal engine management without artificial limitations.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

@dragonfly

The FIA did do that...by taking the exhaust aperture away from the diffuser.
They also madated the maximum angle to which you could point the exhaust.

The real shame is they didn't word the ambiguity surrounding modes effectively enough.
What we have here is another flexing wing controversy. When the by-product of doing something legal, is illegal...its very hard to ban.

@Kiril
Its a bit of a pickle the FIA have. Renault will appear to have gained an advantage if the modes are clipped but the engine retains its overrun nature.
Mercedes does not have this characteristic, and therefore it has to revert to artificial means to replicate that.
I dont think the Merc powered or Ferrari powered teams will stand for that.

[Dragonfly]

Correct me if I am wrong but off-throttle maps are not only for blowing additional amount of gasses from the exhaust (In fact I am not sure we here have equal understanding of hot and cold blowing), but they also affect the way engine internal pressure, cooling and not last KERS compensation are managed. Therefore I don't think it's a simple matter and cannot be applied generally to every engine without some of them being run in a detuned mode to guarantee reliability under a limited engine number conditions. Therefore FIA intervention so late and in a very specific area of engine management stinks of staging the championship before it even began.

JET
I think that fixing the exhaust exits higher in a more limited spacial box, like they used to be, was the better solution. You cannot remove the effect of exhaust gasses unless they are blown behind the rear wing (not sure even then) but with the lack of chimneys and other appendages on the bodywork, the effect or the difference whether blowing or not would be negligible.

[hardingfv32]

[If true then I wonder why such a big rake of the car (almost biggest). I thought that engen maping helps with that concept. If they are weak on that department, why the rake then?

1) It helped last LAST year.

2) Rake could improve the performance of the floor.

Brian

[the EDGE]

Isn't it true that the FIA released a statement back in October that they are going to forbid teams from running any level of off throttle maps that can enable them to use the exhaust gases for aerodynamic benefit. As far as I remember, there was a restriction that you can open the throttle for up to a maximum limit of 10% or 20 % something like that.

Then why are teams again trying to find a way past this when they know that FIA is not gonna allow it anymore? Someone please enlighten me..

the new FIA ban specifically closes a loop hole in relation to this. They limited the throttle to a percentage so teams could have simply had a bigger throttle opening and thus use the same percentage but allow more fuel through

and of course...they would have tried to do this in the pursuit of winning

[hardingfv32]

And I have reviewed a couple of testing videos, and the most prominent car off throttle is....yup, Red Bull.

None of the participants seem to thing there is anything wrong. this latest FIA action is in regard to a possible loophole.

No participants an complaining about the off throttle sounds. While not unusual, you guys are making something out of nothing.

"AUTOSPORT understands that the issue relates to the extreme possibility of a team trying to make use of a bigger throttle opening than is allowed, to help increase the flow of exhaust gases by inducing a misfire.

Sources have confirmed that the FIA has worked with the manufacturer involved to cut off this potential avenue of development. An updated version of the software for F1's Standard ECU - which controls the engine maps - will be released before the season-opening Australian Grand Prix.

The FIA does not suspect that any team was making use of this loophole at the present time, although such an action could not have been ruled out if outfits had found out about it later in the campaign."

Brian

[Dragonfly]

The way I understand it there's a potential exploit in the SECU control software. And they are going to upgrade it.
(Possibly opening 2 smaller loopholes )

[hardingfv32]

So, on the engine front, there's always inequality. Renault have been allowed about 3 or 4 times to modify their engine, right?

There is absolutely no indication that the participants feel there is engine inequality.

Brian

[hardingfv32]

One thing I don't like because it seems as deliberately done by FIA is the ambiguity of the current exhaust rules.

The team engineers are responsible for the wording of the exhaust rules. I would say they are as clear as engineers feel is necessary.

Brian

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

There is absolutely no indication that the participants feel there is engine inequality.

Brian

Really?

I recall Horner screaming mad for 2 years running.

http://en.espnf1.com/redbull/motorsport ... 21923.html


And as it happens, it was Mercedes who alerted the FIA over a potential loophole in the software. They alerted the FIA before anyone could utilise it, or indeed if anyone is currently utilising it.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 43852.html
Expect some developments here....

[Pup]

Expect some developments here....

Yeah, its a curious article. I have an extremely hard time believing that Renault wasn't involved, when they said themselves that they'd found a loophole to exploit. But I do find it perfectly believable that Mercedes or McLaren initiated the protest. In fact, I was a bit surprised at the ruling yesterday, since I thought Brawn was one of the defenders of the loophole, and he rarely loses an argument with the FIA.

[Richard]

There is absolutely no indication that the participants feel there is engine inequality.

Sorry Brian I have to correct you on that, its been a big sticking point for some time, hence the chaos at Silverstone 2011.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Yeah, its a curious article. I have an extremely hard time believing that Renault wasn't involved, when they said themselves that they'd found a loophole to exploit. But I do find it perfectly believable that Mercedes or McLaren initiated the protest. In fact, I was a bit surprised at the ruling yesterday, since I thought Brawn was one of the defenders of the loophole, and he rarely loses an argument with the FIA.

Well he hasnt had much joy in the last 2 years!

At the start of the week we hear a Renault sport big wig talking of this "development" as you pointed pup. Mercedes must have known about this for some time and reacted to this statement.

I think we have only reached the tip of the ice berg on this. This technology coincided with Renaults application to the FIA for engine mods in late 2009/2010.
It was done under the guise of reliability.
There must be a link to Red Bulls' complaints in 2009, the Renault mods that prevailed and the exhaust technology that has served this team so well over the last couple of seasons.

The FIA cannot reverse this, its legal and would be unfair on Renault IF the RS28-2012 is using overrun out of necessity and within the remit set by the FIA.
But equally it would be unfair on Cosworth Ferrari and Mercedes if they weren't allowed to pursue this particular avenue.

Hell come to think of it, would Red Bull technology(operating outside the RRA) have a bench to test engines?
Or scramble the ECU to come up with this loophole discovered by Mercedes?
I'm not trying to be controversial, I just think this is a huge game of cat and mouse being played behind the scenes.

Just like to reiterate Im not having a go at either Renault or Red Bull. It just appears there is alot of smoke emanating from this. If it dies down, I for one will be extremely surprised.

[hardingfv32]

[Sorry Brian I have to correct you on that, its been a big sticking point for some time, hence the chaos at Silverstone 2011.

I will narrow my statement to: "There is absolutely no indication that the participants feel there is an engine HP or torque inequality."

Brian

[hardingfv32]

If it dies down, I for one will be extremely surprised.

You guys are the only one making a big deal. Someone point out a loophole not being used at this time and the FIA closed it. What is the big deal?

At the start of the week we hear a Renault sport big wig talking of this "development" as you pointed pup. Mercedes must have known about this for some time and reacted to this statement.

What fool makes ANY reference to a development his team might have? What fool listens to such an idiot? If Mercedes responds to such talk, that would explain a lot about their position in the performance picking order.

Finally, exhaust blowing of body parts, while not completely eliminated, is all but neutered under the rules that were developed by the team engineers for the this purpose. So now you think cold blowing, never a substantial performance enhancer, is going to make the slightest difference?
We have a minor effect, exhaust blowing, being modified by another minor effect, cold blowing. Now, of coarse you can argue even the smallest of improvements matters. I say get real.

Brian