Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[ripper]

Here we go:

1 - Nel post qualifica di ieri Mercedes ha dovuto sostituire una candela (sotto la visione di Jo Bauer) sulla PU numero 4 di Hamilton #FUnoAT

After qualy Mercedes changed a spark plug on HAM's car, on PU number 4 (under Jo Bauer's control)

2 - Ferrari e Mercedes utilizzano lo stesso fornitore di candele, una delle aziende leader del settore: la giapponese NGK #FUnoAT

Ferrari and Mercedes use same spark plug supplier: NGK

3 -I danneggiamenti alle candele dipendono principalmente dall'endotermico e dalla sua combustione. Centra poco il discorso "qualità" #FUnoAT

Damage caused to spark plugs is mainly related to ICE and its combustion. It is not related with quality. (he means it probably wasn't a faulty spark plug to cause the retirement)

4 - Ferrari e Mercedes sfruttano la combustione a superficie dove il 3% della miscela viene acceso in una precamera attorno alla candela #FUnoAT

Ferrari and Mercedes use "combustione a superficie" -> superficial combustion (??? i guess he's referring to mahle system) where 3% of the mix gets ignited in a prechamber around spark plug

5 - Una tipologia di combustione (dall'esterno all'interno, solitamente è il contrario) che mette maggiormente sotto stress le candele #FUnoAT

This kind of combustion (from external to internal, usually it's different) stresses more spark plugs

6 - Ferrari, per mettere potenza oltre a quella persa dal minor consumo d'olio, ha spinto molto nella combustione (ICE) sull'EVO 4 #FUnoAT

Ferrari, in order to achieve more power than the one lost from less oil consumption, pushed a lot on ICE combustion on EVO4

7 - La PU Ferrari EVO 4 non era progettata inizialmente per sottostare alla normativa sull'olio introdotta a partire da Monza #FUnoAT

Ferrari EVO4 PU wasn't initially engineered to be compliant with new oil consumption limit norm introduced in Monza

8 - Il dubbio Ferrari: rischiare mettendo CV con la EVO 4 (+ nuovo raffreddamento) o portare altra EVO 3 perdendo CV da minor olio?

Ferrari's dilemma: risk more by gaining HP by adopting EVO 4 (plus new cooling system) or bring another EVO 3 PU losing some HP due to lower oil consumption?

9 - Per vincere il mondiale, Ferrari non poteva aprire ulteriormente il gap di 20-25 CV tra EVO 4 Mercedes e sua EVO 3. Ci hanno provato #FUnoAT

In order to try to win WDC Ferrari couldn't afford to increase HP gap between his EVO3 and Mercedes' EVO4 (quantified in 20-25HP). They made a bet. (he means that there's a gap of 20-25 hp between FER EVO3 that uses 1,2 lt/100 km and MER's EVO4, if they adopted another EVO3 that uses less oil and so has less HP they would have lost anyway, so they made a bet)

10 - E Ferrari ha fatto bene a rischiare. Con 30 CV in meno le gare le termini ma non le vinci. E contava solo vincere dopo Singapore #FUnoAT

Ferrari did the right choice to take a risk. With 30 HP less (than MER) you can finish races, but you can't win them. After Singapore winning was the only thing to do.



My english sucks

[3jawchuck]

....
6 - Ferrari, per mettere potenza oltre a quella persa dal minor consumo d'olio, ha spinto molto nella combustione (ICE) sull'EVO 4 #FUnoAT

Ferrari, in order to achieve more power than the one lost from less oil consumption, pushed a lot on ICE combustion on EVO4
....

I find it very hard to believe that the tiny amount of oil possibly consumed over the race distance would make that much difference over a whole race pace. Surely not enough to justify endangering the reliability of your already fairly solid ICE, at such a crucial stage in the fight?

Although we still have no idea of the details, how can just short of a litre of imperfect hydrocarbons be such a huge differentiator in performance?

Additionally, around Baku, didn't the FIA place restrictions on certain types of combustible compounds allowed in the oil? So, even if any oil burning advantage is to be had, its potential was reduced around Baku.

So, how can burning such a small proportion of this, compound restricted, lubricating oil, lead to such a huge alleged difference in performance?

[supermarine]

I suspect there are features of the oil that help the combustion process, it isn't so much that there is more energy in the oil it is that you can use a special formulation to avoid knock and achieve very lean burning.

If you think back to 2014 there were stories that one of reasons Mclaren was doing so badly despite running the Merc engine was they couldn't use the bespoke Petronas fuel and lubricants because they were tied to Mobil One commercially. I think there was much more to this than most people thought at the time because the blend of fuel and lube was important in ways we are only just coming to understand now.

Given that Ferrari had a second oil tank they clearly took a pretty extreme route in maximising the use of oil burning. They took quite a hit when that was banned and the reduction to 0.9l has made things harder still. I think that Vettel's surprisingly calm acceptance of his reliability woes indicates that the team was aware that spec 4 was a risk but one they had to take to have any chance of the championship. When you think about the lead times for engine development mid-season rule changes are a huge headache -- particularly if you are playing catch up.

[wuzak]

Mercedes replaced a spark plug in Parc Ferme:

Technical Delegate’s Report
The following parts and parameters have been replaced / changed during the Parc Fermé yesterday
and today:
Mercedes:
Car 44: Rear wing assembly
Cylinder #6 spark plug
LHS ignition coil pack

So the deciding thing in the championship is that Mercedes detected a problem after qualifying, and Ferrari didn't.

[AnotherAlex]

Thanks for the translation Ripper, (my Italian isn't what it should be ).

It's no doubt the case that there was a higher limit on oil consumption when Ferrari started on the design of the 4th PU but I'm sure they moved away from that requirement at an early stage, otherwise they would have done the same thing as Mercedes and introduced it in Belgium.

Hopefully Ferrari will find a solution that doesn't involve turning down their engines for the remaining races.

Mercedes replaced a spark plug in Parc Ferme:

Technical Delegate’s Report
The following parts and parameters have been replaced / changed during the Parc Fermé yesterday
and today:
Mercedes:
Car 44: Rear wing assembly
Cylinder #6 spark plug
LHS ignition coil pack

So the deciding thing in the championship is that Mercedes detected a problem after qualifying, and Ferrari didn't.

I'm surprised Mercedes were allowed to do quite so much work on the car in Parc Fermé; the FIA might as well be up-front and honest, and scrap it. You start on your Q2 tyres, if you're in the top 10, (even if you have flat-spotted them ) otherwise you can do what you like to the car before the race.

[3jawchuck]

I'm surprised Mercedes were allowed to do quite so much work on the car in Parc Fermé; the FIA might as well be up-front and honest, and scrap it. You start on your Q2 tyres, if you're in the top 10, (even if you have flat-spotted them ) otherwise you can do what you like to the car before the race.

That's not even that much stuff, compared to some teams. Everyone is obliged to follow the same rules in this regard so I don't see the problem.

[wuzak]

It is an interesting scenario. If Mercedes weren't able to change it, then maybe Hamilton doesn't win.

[Jolle]

Thanks for the translation Ripper, (my Italian isn't what it should be ).

It's no doubt the case that there was a higher limit on oil consumption when Ferrari started on the design of the 4th PU but I'm sure they moved away from that requirement at an early stage, otherwise they would have done the same thing as Mercedes and introduced it in Belgium.

Hopefully Ferrari will find a solution that doesn't involve turning down their engines for the remaining races.

Mercedes replaced a spark plug in Parc Ferme:

Technical Delegate’s Report
The following parts and parameters have been replaced / changed during the Parc Fermé yesterday
and today:
Mercedes:
Car 44: Rear wing assembly
Cylinder #6 spark plug
LHS ignition coil pack

So the deciding thing in the championship is that Mercedes detected a problem after qualifying, and Ferrari didn't.

I'm surprised Mercedes were allowed to do quite so much work on the car in Parc Fermé; the FIA might as well be up-front and honest, and scrap it. You start on your Q2 tyres, if you're in the top 10, (even if you have flat-spotted them ) otherwise you can do what you like to the car before the race.

You should look at the parc ferme reports which are published before every race and have a look how parc ferme works in F1 before trying to make a conspiracy therory

[AnotherAlex]

You should look at the parc ferme reports which are published before every race and have a look how parc ferme works in F1 before trying to make a conspiracy therory

LOL - you think that was a conspiracy theory?


You're right, 3jawchuck, the rules are the same for everyone but, like so many of the cost saving rules, I think F1 would be better without it.

As for the Parc Fermé regulations, which are very loosely summarised on Formula1.com here: https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... Ferme.html, with the actual detail in Article 34 of the Sporting Regulations, there are 24 areas in which work may be carried out.
The work carried out on Hamilton's car (and, no doubt, similar work on many of the others) doesn't fit into any of those so it is covered by the catch-all statement:

Any work not listed above may only be undertaken with the approval of the FIA technical delegate following a written request from the team concerned. It must be clear that any replacement part a team wishes to fit is similar in design, mass, inertia and function to the original. Any parts removed will be retained by the FIA.

hence my suggestion that pre-race PF is of limited value.

[Sevach]

If those rumours are correct, Ferrari is basically pre-season testing these more aggressive engines, and has run into a couple of niggles, sadly at this stage that's not good enough.

[Jolle]

You should look at the parc ferme reports which are published before every race and have a look how parc ferme works in F1 before trying to make a conspiracy therory

LOL - you think that was a conspiracy theory?


You're right, 3jawchuck, the rules are the same for everyone but, like so many of the cost saving rules, I think F1 would be better without it.

As for the Parc Fermé regulations, which are very loosely summarised on Formula1.com here: https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... Ferme.html, with the actual detail in Article 34 of the Sporting Regulations, there are 24 areas in which work may be carried out.
The work carried out on Hamilton's car (and, no doubt, similar work on many of the others) doesn't fit into any of those so it is covered by the catch-all statement:

Any work not listed above may only be undertaken with the approval of the FIA technical delegate following a written request from the team concerned. It must be clear that any replacement part a team wishes to fit is similar in design, mass, inertia and function to the original. Any parts removed will be retained by the FIA.

hence my suggestion that pre-race PF is of limited value.

The formula1.com site is a bit of a dummies guide to the rules. This one is more in-depth:
https://www.fia.com/file/56346/download ... n=3tFsAJzj

The Parc Ferme rules are not there to make sure there is no work done on the car but to make sure, like in the old days, that the car is completely stripped, set up in a whole different way and make the mechanics work around the clock from Saturday until the race. This objective is met, they all have decent working hours in the pit and actually see the hotel room that is booked for them.

[MrPotatoHead]

Wild speculation is wild speculation.

Please show me where the Ferrari is slower and has less power than the Mercedes now vs the start of the season...
Far too much fantasy surrounding the oil and Ferrari.

[hurril]

Wild speculation is wild speculation.

Please show me where the Ferrari is slower and has less power than the Mercedes now vs the start of the season...
Far too much fantasy surrounding the oil and Ferrari.

Do you have facts about this or did you just ask a rhetorical question?

[MrPotatoHead]

Wild speculation is wild speculation.

Please show me where the Ferrari is slower and has less power than the Mercedes now vs the start of the season...
Far too much fantasy surrounding the oil and Ferrari.

Do you have facts about this or did you just ask a rhetorical question?

Since when were facts needed here? I thought we just share someone onlines faceless opinion as if it’s fact?

Where is the sarcasm button here?

[oT v1]

In terms of moving forward to the next races, what does Ferrari do with the engine? Could Vettel's brand new engine have to be scraped? (excuse my lack of motor knowledge) and could this be a one off or is this an inherent problem in the new spec? I'm guessing they'll have to take another engine penalty hit and use a new, non-maximised, spec 3 engine.