engine blow up

[mep]

I wonder what happens inside the engine if it gets broken.
Which parts do exactly cause the engine to blow up in a big
cloud of fog?
I don't think that you will loose the hole engine,
if a piston ring breaks.

[tomislavp4]

It can be almost anything i guess.
Even if one small part brakes you´ll get explosion and there it is, you´re out

[manchild]

Its usually either problem with valves or with connecting rod. It is enough that single valve to looses pressure in its pneumatic lifter and when piston hits it engine will "blow" but such blow will go trough the exhaust.

Other typical cause is breaking of connecting rod which than penetrates engine block. That's real "engine explosino" If piston drops down fuel reaches tha engine block, mixes with oil mist/fumes and burns up blowing out trough that hole in engine block and trough the exhaust. All of those two are usually only initial failures leading to further demage to the engine caused by intertion on engine parts (small initial cloud of smoke followed by big cloud of smoke trough both exhaust pipes).

*Not F1

[mep]

ok when such structural parts like a camshaft breakes it's
clear that the engine is dead.
But what abaut those smal parts like piston rings etc.
Does it mean that the race is over if they break?
Or does it simply mean that your engine is runing on less
power because one or two cylinders fall out?

Ferrari has very less engine problems instead of Mercedes.
So why are the Mercedes engines always so bad on reliability.
Especially during the year 2004.
The pistons from Ferrari are made by the same company(Mahle) like those from Mercedes.

[DaveKillens]

The Ferrari engine that blew up at Suzuka was the same one used in the wet Chinese GP. Racig in the rain is very brutal on Formula One engines because they have to use the traction control so much. The traction control is done by cutting the spark to the engines, so when it is activated, it's not a smooth process.
The shock loads to such parts as the pistons, rod, and crankshaft is magnified, and leads to a reduced engine life. An engine that can safely endure two GP race cycles in the dry has a much increased risk of death if it has to endure much traction control.
If you noticed, the engine expired very soon after a pit stop. Coming into the pits, sitting while refuelling and wheels are changed, then leaving the pits is when very little air passes through the radiators, leading to temporary higher temperatures.
So combining the effect of a rainy race with a lot of traction control with that last pit stop, the engine got too hot, parts expanded more than expected, and any weaknesses or minor cracks or failures were magnified. Most likely a bearing tightened up, led to increased torsional load on a rod, it broke, went crazy inside the block and tore up the piston, valves, head, block, and everything else.

[mep]

Two thing I observe for many years now is that most of the
engines blow up shortly after a pit stop.
This was very spectacular during the Hockenheim GP
2001(I think).
The circuit was very harmful for the engines but most of them
blow after the pit stop.

The second thing has something to do with the new engine rule.
After the engines had to last two races I thought that
the Mercedes engines are used to blow up after a short period of
time or never.
Last year Kimi had often a engine problem whith a brand new engine.
It was even worse in the year 2004 where the engines blow up all the time.

[mep]

The traction control is done by cutting the spark to the engines, so when it is activated, it's not a smooth process.
Most likely a bearing tightened up, led to increased torsional load on a rod, it broke, went crazy inside the block and tore up the piston, valves, head, block, and everything else.

Good explanaition.
If you are live on a race track you will hear that the Ferrari
traction control is very brutal, strange sounding and very long
activated.

[DaveKillens]

Prolonged running of the traction control could do something as simple as warping a rod by just a few degrees. Then when the pit stop occurs, heat expands the rod, crankshaft, piston, and bearings, leading to metal on metal contact.

[manchild]

I think that's how first TC system worked. Modern systems don't cut ignition but reduce fuel injection. At least Renault has such system for years now. Perhaps Ferrari's system still cuts ingnition.

[DaveKillens]

It could be manchild, I don't know the exact method. But regardless of what system is applied, cutting spark or fuel in this manner places tremendous, brutal loads on the drivetrain. It shortens the life of any engine.

[peroa]

Well, Alonso said they have a 120% engine available as they only used it for 80% in China.

So either the Renault has a different system or your explanation is a bit off because every time I hear something about engines in the wet everybody says that it is not so stressful in wet conditions.

[Buxer]

I think that's how first TC system worked. Modern systems don't cut ignition but reduce fuel injection. At least Renault has such system for years now. Perhaps Ferrari's system still cuts ingnition.

"As mentioned earlier there are various ways to implement traction control. In Formula One, wheelspin is reduced by cutting the engine power. While each engine has its own system, the power output is either reduced by cutting fuel supply or by retarding or suppressing the spark. Obviously, cutting the fuel to one or more cylinders is beneficial for fuel economy. Current F1 systems use a combination of these factors to ensure optimum performance. A traction control system can be heard in operation very clearly when cars launch out of slow corners. The engine produces a rough sound, caused by the misfires (a cylinder's fuel that doesn't get fired)."

[DaveKillens]

Well, Alonso said they have a 120% engine available as they only used it for 80% in China.

So either the Renault has a different system or your explanation is a bit off because every time I hear something about engines in the wet everybody says that it is not so stressful in wet conditions.

It is the first assumption Peroa, because of the lower tire adhesion. Because the drivetrain cannot deliver maximum torque to the driveshaft, then lower values imply longer component life. But since a Formula One car delivers so much power, some form of traction control is used by all. And that is where the killer of engines lives. It cuts out the power, and rather abruptly. If you ever listen closely to traction controlling working, instead of the smooth and consistent firing noises coming out of the exhaust pipe, you hear distinct bangs and pops. And each one delivers a shock to the drivetrain. The idea towards longer component life is to have a smooth, consistent delivery of torque through the drivetrain. That way, the gears and parts don't get large, abrupt shocks, but a lot of lesser shocks.

[manchild]

Not cutting fuel but reducing amount or fuel. Spark can be only cut but amount of fuel can be reduced and such TC preserves engine much more than spark cutting.

[Steven]

It could be manchild, I don't know the exact method. But regardless of what system is applied, cutting spark or fuel in this manner places tremendous, brutal loads on the drivetrain. It shortens the life of any engine.

Well Dave, I honoustly can't see how reduction of fuel input into a cylinder can actually increase the load on a piston or connection rod. It looks to me that it's even the opposite as less ignited fuel is less expansion pressure just after the ignition.