Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
roon
roon
445
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:17 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:06 pm
atanatizante wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:48 pm


That means producing 160HP constantly from MGU-H there is no reason to use ES anymore, isn`t it?
Only just that it`s needed to harvest the energy MGU-K is producing under braking. No to mention its use for spooling the turbo and engine ancillaries ...

Another question I would like to ask whether turbo spooling being linked via ICE through the crankshaft could aid in lowering mechanical ICE resistance (internal friction) hence lower the fuel consumption in the end?
Not quite. If full turbocompounding is used, they could still utilize the ES in a wastegates-open electric supercharger mode, with a non-H-driven MGUK, for 4MJ/lap, lasting up to 33 seconds (that oft repeated figure). Full piston power (no H reclamation) + 160 MGUK hp.

Mechanical turbocompounding would be more efficient at specific speeds. Mechanical variability comes at a cost to efficiency and weight--transmissions, clutches, etc. I do not know which type of system (electrical or mechanical) would be, net, more efficient.
I was going to make the same point.

Your numbers are a little off though. In supercharger mode the drain on the ES is 120kW plus whatever it takes to drive the compressor, maybe 40kW (even with the wastegates open the turbine makes a contribution) so the max time in that mode would be 25 seconds. They would need to switch the H from driving the K to charging the ES at some point on the straights so they had another 4MJ with which to rinse and repeat.
Good catch. H to ES is 2MJ, same as the prescribed 2MJ from the K to the ES. The H-to-ES charge rate is unlimited unlike from the K; so they could potentially charge the H-supplied half of the ES at a high rate, or just bleed it off gradually over the course of the lap (on throttle lap time minus ~25 sec supercharger mode).

A higher H charge rate could explain the double battery rumor. One bank optimized for charging via the K, the other bank optimized for charging via the H.

User avatar
henry
254
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:43 pm
henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:17 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:06 pm


Not quite. If full turbocompounding is used, they could still utilize the ES in a wastegates-open electric supercharger mode, with a non-H-driven MGUK, for 4MJ/lap, lasting up to 33 seconds (that oft repeated figure). Full piston power (no H reclamation) + 160 MGUK hp.

Mechanical turbocompounding would be more efficient at specific speeds. Mechanical variability comes at a cost to efficiency and weight--transmissions, clutches, etc. I do not know which type of system (electrical or mechanical) would be, net, more efficient.
I was going to make the same point.

Your numbers are a little off though. In supercharger mode the drain on the ES is 120kW plus whatever it takes to drive the compressor, maybe 40kW (even with the wastegates open the turbine makes a contribution) so the max time in that mode would be 25 seconds. They would need to switch the H from driving the K to charging the ES at some point on the straights so they had another 4MJ with which to rinse and repeat.
Good catch. H to ES is 2MJ, same as the prescribed 2MJ from the K to the ES. The H-to-ES charge rate is unlimited unlike from the K; so they could potentially charge the H-supplied half of the ES at a high rate, or just bleed it off gradually over the course of the lap (on throttle lap time minus ~25 sec supercharger mode).

A higher H charge rate could explain the double battery rumor. One bank optimized for charging via the K, the other bank optimized for charging via the H.
I think I was wrong 4MJ to the K is 33 seconds. Nonetheless this does show that pursuing more H power is potentially valuable.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
henry
254
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:35 pm

How does the turbine makes a contribution with waste-gates open?. and another thing, in free load mode "electric supercharging with waste-gates open" the "H" is sharing "ES" power with "K".
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that the turbine makes a contribution to driving the compressor so the H doesn’t have to provide the full power needed to drive the compressor.

The wastegates don’t completely bypass the turbine but instead vent it part way along the exhaust path in the turbine.

I entirely agree with you. The ES drives both the H and K. I thought Insaid that and provided an estimate of the power required.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
henry
254
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:43 pm
henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:17 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:06 pm


Not quite. If full turbocompounding is used, they could still utilize the ES in a wastegates-open electric supercharger mode, with a non-H-driven MGUK, for 4MJ/lap, lasting up to 33 seconds (that oft repeated figure). Full piston power (no H reclamation) + 160 MGUK hp.

Mechanical turbocompounding would be more efficient at specific speeds. Mechanical variability comes at a cost to efficiency and weight--transmissions, clutches, etc. I do not know which type of system (electrical or mechanical) would be, net, more efficient.
I was going to make the same point.

Your numbers are a little off though. In supercharger mode the drain on the ES is 120kW plus whatever it takes to drive the compressor, maybe 40kW (even with the wastegates open the turbine makes a contribution) so the max time in that mode would be 25 seconds. They would need to switch the H from driving the K to charging the ES at some point on the straights so they had another 4MJ with which to rinse and repeat.
Good catch. H to ES is 2MJ, same as the prescribed 2MJ from the K to the ES. The H-to-ES charge rate is unlimited unlike from the K; so they could potentially charge the H-supplied half of the ES at a high rate, or just bleed it off gradually over the course of the lap (on throttle lap time minus ~25 sec supercharger mode).

A higher H charge rate could explain the double battery rumor. One bank optimized for charging via the K, the other bank optimized for charging via the H.
I rechecked. The flow from H to ES is entirely unconstrained. So the H can charge at any rate. I have in the past suggested that the Honda extra charge mode might be asymmetric, driving the H at 120 kW but charging the ES at a higher rate. This would increase the average charge rate.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

roon
roon
445
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with the wastegates open. If zero, then 4MJ minus energy consumed by the compressor during 'supercharging-only' mode, and lasting significantly less than 33 seconds. If ~40kW, or whatever compressor power requirements are, then the full 33 s of such a wastegated supercharing mode would be possible, with the ES solely powering the K.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-11
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:34 pm
It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with the wastegates open. If zero, then 4MJ minus energy consumed by the compressor during 'supercharging-only' mode, and lasting significantly less than 33 seconds. If ~40kW, or whatever compressor power requirements are, then the full 33 s of such a wastegated supercharing mode would be possible, with the ES solely powering the K.
"It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with waste-gates open" How can the turbine harvest power with waste-gates open?

hurril
hurril
45
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:48 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:34 pm
It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with the wastegates open. If zero, then 4MJ minus energy consumed by the compressor during 'supercharging-only' mode, and lasting significantly less than 33 seconds. If ~40kW, or whatever compressor power requirements are, then the full 33 s of such a wastegated supercharing mode would be possible, with the ES solely powering the K.
"It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with waste-gates open" How can the turbine harvest power with waste-gates open?
Blowdown.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-11
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:43 pm
henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:17 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:06 pm


Not quite. If full turbocompounding is used, they could still utilize the ES in a wastegates-open electric supercharger mode, with a non-H-driven MGUK, for 4MJ/lap, lasting up to 33 seconds (that oft repeated figure). Full piston power (no H reclamation) + 160 MGUK hp.

Mechanical turbocompounding would be more efficient at specific speeds. Mechanical variability comes at a cost to efficiency and weight--transmissions, clutches, etc. I do not know which type of system (electrical or mechanical) would be, net, more efficient.
I was going to make the same point.

Your numbers are a little off though. In supercharger mode the drain on the ES is 120kW plus whatever it takes to drive the compressor, maybe 40kW (even with the wastegates open the turbine makes a contribution) so the max time in that mode would be 25 seconds. They would need to switch the H from driving the K to charging the ES at some point on the straights so they had another 4MJ with which to rinse and repeat.
Good catch. H to ES is 2MJ, same as the prescribed 2MJ from the K to the ES. The H-to-ES charge rate is unlimited unlike from the K; so they could potentially charge the H-supplied half of the ES at a high rate, or just bleed it off gradually over the course of the lap (on throttle lap time minus ~25 sec supercharger mode).

A higher H charge rate could explain the double battery rumor. One bank optimized for charging via the K, the other bank optimized for charging via the H.
"The one bank optimized for charging via the "K" will never be fully charged (it will only be 50% charged) after after the first deployment from being fully charged.

User avatar
henry
254
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:48 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:34 pm
It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with the wastegates open. If zero, then 4MJ minus energy consumed by the compressor during 'supercharging-only' mode, and lasting significantly less than 33 seconds. If ~40kW, or whatever compressor power requirements are, then the full 33 s of such a wastegated supercharing mode would be possible, with the ES solely powering the K.
"It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with waste-gates open" How can the turbine harvest power with waste-gates open?
What do you not understand from this post I made to you about this subject?
henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:05 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:35 pm

How does the turbine makes a contribution with waste-gates open?. and another thing, in free load mode "electric supercharging with waste-gates open" the "H" is sharing "ES" power with "K".
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that the turbine makes a contribution to driving the compressor so the H doesn’t have to provide the full power needed to drive the compressor.

The wastegates don’t completely bypass the turbine but instead vent it part way along the exhaust path in the turbine.

I entirely agree with you. The ES drives both the H and K. I thought Insaid that and provided an estimate of the power required.
As @hurril says the proportion of energy which continues to drive the turbine when the wastegates are open is called “blowdown”

You may be confused by multiple uses of the term “harvest”.

In normal use the turbine harvests energy from the exhaust gases. This harvested energy is used to drive the compressor, if there is more energy than is needed by the compressor the MGU-H harvests that excess energy as electrical energy and that energy can be sent to either the ES or the MGU-K in any quantity and at any rate (power).

In supercharger mode the wastegates open, the turbine harvests less energy from the exhaust gases (but not zero) and if that energy is not enough to drive the compressor the MGU-H draws energy from the ES to help the turbine drive the compressor.

So in supercharger mode the ES is supplying 120KW to the MGU-K and a smaller amount, maybe 40KW, to the MGU-H. If supercharger mode is used for the full 33 seconds that 4 MJ permits, then the ES must also supply 1.32 MJ to the ES.

When supercharger mode stops the MGU-H stops assisting the turbine and instead harvests energy. Let’s say it does that at 60KW. 2 things can happen to that energy. It can be sent to the MGU-K or it can be sent to the ES. If it is sent to the K we then have the situation that the K has been driven for 33 seconds at 120KW and some more seconds at 60KW.

Of course things are more complicated than that. At times the MGU-K is driven simultaneously by the ES and the MGU-H. If the H delivers 60KW then the ES can only deliver 60KW because the K can’t exceed 120KW. In that mode the 120KW can be delivered for 66 seconds.

No doubt you will point me at the Mercedes article with the magic 33 second number. It is wrong. Just as it is wrong about the effect of altitude on the ICE.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
godlameroso
371
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

Supercharger mode could be entirely powered by the crank. If the MGU-K puts a 40-50kW drag on the crank to drive the turbo by sending that energy to the MGU-H then you don't use any ES energy to power the turbo. Wastegates can be fully open, just like the Ferrari does about 1 second after it's flat out. Very noticeable in Austria, Renault does this as well.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-11
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:33 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:48 pm
roon wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:34 pm
It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with the wastegates open. If zero, then 4MJ minus energy consumed by the compressor during 'supercharging-only' mode, and lasting significantly less than 33 seconds. If ~40kW, or whatever compressor power requirements are, then the full 33 s of such a wastegated supercharing mode would be possible, with the ES solely powering the K.
"It depends on how much power the turbine harvests with waste-gates open" How can the turbine harvest power with waste-gates open?
What do you not understand from this post I made to you about this subject?
henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:05 pm
saviour stivala wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:35 pm

How does the turbine makes a contribution with waste-gates open?. and another thing, in free load mode "electric supercharging with waste-gates open" the "H" is sharing "ES" power with "K".
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that the turbine makes a contribution to driving the compressor so the H doesn’t have to provide the full power needed to drive the compressor.

The wastegates don’t completely bypass the turbine but instead vent it part way along the exhaust path in the turbine.

I entirely agree with you. The ES drives both the H and K. I thought Insaid that and provided an estimate of the power required.
As @hurril says the proportion of energy which continues to drive the turbine when the wastegates are open is called “blowdown”

You may be confused by multiple uses of the term “harvest”.

In normal use the turbine harvests energy from the exhaust gases. This harvested energy is used to drive the compressor, if there is more energy than is needed by the compressor the MGU-H harvests that excess energy as electrical energy and that energy can be sent to either the ES or the MGU-K in any quantity and at any rate (power).

In supercharger mode the wastegates open, the turbine harvests less energy from the exhaust gases (but not zero) and if that energy is not enough to drive the compressor the MGU-H draws energy from the ES to help the turbine drive the compressor.

So in supercharger mode the ES is supplying 120KW to the MGU-K and a smaller amount, maybe 40KW, to the MGU-H. If supercharger mode is used for the full 33 seconds that 4 MJ permits, then the ES must also supply 1.32 MJ to the ES.

When supercharger mode stops the MGU-H stops assisting the turbine and instead harvests energy. Let’s say it does that at 60KW. 2 things can happen to that energy. It can be sent to the MGU-K or it can be sent to the ES. If it is sent to the K we then have the situation that the K has been driven for 33 seconds at 120KW and some more seconds at 60KW.

Of course things are more complicated than that. At times the MGU-K is driven simultaneously by the ES and the MGU-H. If the H delivers 60KW then the ES can only deliver 60KW because the K can’t exceed 120KW. In that mode the 120KW can be delivered for 66 seconds.

No doubt you will point me at the Mercedes article with the magic 33 second number. It is wrong. Just as it is wrong about the effect of altitude on the ICE.
Yes, a lot of things are wrong, except that of what you say, of which is riddled with inaccurate, contradicting, confusing and speculative assumptions.

dans79
dans79
216
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

henry wrote:
Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:33 pm
So in supercharger mode the ES is supplying 120KW to the MGU-K and a smaller amount, maybe 40KW, to the MGU-H. If supercharger mode is used for the full 33 seconds that 4 MJ permits, then the ES must also supply 1.32 MJ to the ES.
This can not be done, as it would clearly violate the rules. If you check appendix 3 of the technical regulations you will find this.

Art. 1.27
The difference between the maximum and the minimum state of charge of the ES may not exceed 4MJ at any time the car is on the track.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-11
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

There is no question or doubt about how the F1 turbocharger is driven (being spun/rotated), why confuse this here discussion by pushing the possibility of turbocharger being gear or mechanically driven by the engine? When the turbocharger as used in F1 is driven/spun/rotated by the exhaust gasses it is working as a turbocharger, when the turbocharger (as a unit, compressor and turbine mandated to be on a common shaft) is driven/spun/rotated by the “H” with waste-gates open it is working as an electrically driven supercharger. When the “H’ is helping to reduce/eliminate turbo lag or to control the boost (turbo RPM) the turbo is being electrically assisted. The thing cannot be called or described/termed as just a supercharger without drive description.
The supposition that the FERRARI ES/battery inside the size and weight mandated box is split in two, with one part being charged by the “H” and one part being charged by the “K” does not make sense, as the part that is supposedly being charged by the “K” could never be fully recharged.
The 2017 Mercedes Spielberg “ERS” (and not “ES”) deployment article states that they managed to deploy 160 bhp for 33.33 seconds of the lap which amounts to approx. 50% of the 68 second lap, this on a lap with more straights than braking points. The article did not said or in any way meant that that deployment was deployed in one go, I am 100 percent sure that deployment was effected at viperous calculated advantageous points around the lap, if with the unlimited flow from “H” to “K” (160 bhp) being possible/allowed to flow from “K” to crankshaft for unlimited time, what was holding them back from deploying for longer than a time of 33.33 seconds per lap?.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-11
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

godlameroso wrote:
Sat Jul 14, 2018 1:54 am
Supercharger mode could be entirely powered by the crank. If the MGU-K puts a 40-50kW drag on the crank to drive the turbo by sending that energy to the MGU-H then you don't use any ES energy to power the turbo. Wastegates can be fully open, just like the Ferrari does about 1 second after it's flat out. Very noticeable in Austria, Renault does this as well.
"Free load mode" electric supercharging with waste gates fully open and so exhaust gasses bypassing the turbine, the benefit of which is eleminating exhaust back pressure is the mode that produces maximum power possible, in this mode both the "K" and the "H" are sharing "ES" power. although this mode produces the maximum power possible, it is not the most effecient. I agree that the "K" can flow to and drive the "H". And yes, FERRARI are now a days using the "free load mode " more frequently and regularly during the race, this was made possible by improved reliability and fuel formulations updates that gives superior fuel consumption.

saviour stivala
saviour stivala
-11
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Ferrari Power Unit

Post

Before the new 1.6 turbo hybrid formula first season had even started (2014) the back than FERRARI technically termed by the FERRARI commissioned researchers of Oxford University “free load mode” was on the combustion development of that time said/calculated to produce an extra 25-35 BHP. Fast forward five years I have no doubt that in accordance with combustion and fuel development those BHP numbers have more than double. Those “extra free load mode” BHP produced comes solely out of the combustion process, this as at back the “k” and “H” are still being used as sharing “ES” power, and “ES” power is still fixed to the numbers as were back than.