It’s not as if fia didn’t want to put an extra sensor on Ferrari ERS but they deamed it unlikely to happen this year: "I'm not sure when any more additional sensors can be fitted; probably not until next year." said Whiting end of May. "We want them to put extra monitoring on, but at the moment we're having to do it in a painstaking way. It takes a little longer than we would like. What we're trying to do is to monitor exactly what the differences between the two halves of the battery are. That's the crux of the matter.”
Personally I was expecting other teams to copy the trick more than Ferrari to have silently (‘forced’ to) drop it -if such thing happened.
If an extra sensor was added and it revealed there was something illegal then fia would not be happy to admit this after their earlier statements? Let alone the consequences for Ferrari racing an illegal car. Similar to Haas recently, other teams would demand disqualification? That can’t happen of course, it would bring the sport to discredit.
Anyhow so far the mystery continues, it is part of the ‘magic’ of f1.
On this forum I as hoping for raw data and evidence or graphs/charts of ‘lack’ of straight line speed and energy deployment during qualification lately. Anyone able to analyze this?
Re: Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software
Posted: 04 Oct 2018, 22:27
by timbo
Is it a clear cut case of Ferrari losing an advantage or Mercedes gaining an advantage? Did anybody analyze Merc's GPS performance to see how they compare with themselves earlier this year?
Also, IMO it is possible that Ferrari avoids using Qualifying drivetrain mods to stretch the mileage.
Interesting remarks. Especially at the 3:15 mark...'MGU-H is not allowed to produce boost, as such, so it cannot be used as an electric turbocharger'. Did I miss something?
Interesting remarks. Especially at the 3:15 mark...'MGU-H is not allowed to produce boost, as such, so it cannot be used as an electric turbocharger'. Did I miss something?
I don't know of anything in the technical regulations that directly restricts it. However, it might be one of those things that falls under the "spirit of the rules" catch all.
Interesting remarks. Especially at the 3:15 mark...'MGU-H is not allowed to produce boost, as such, so it cannot be used as an electric turbocharger'. Did I miss something?
I don't know of anything in the technical regulations that directly restricts it. However, it might be one of those things that falls under the "spirit of the rules" catch all.
I'm trying to look at the rules again and wrap my head around this. The only thing it may be is the use of the work 'effected' in a sentence that does not also include the MGU-H. This would be a big change into the way that was considered a way to get maximum power out of the PU.
From businessdictionary.com - Effected means to actually do something, to execute, produce or bring about something. It's an action word of actually doing something.
5.1.6 Pressure charging may only be effected by the use of a sole single stage compressor linked to a sole single stage exhaust turbine by a shaft assembly parallel to the engine crankshaft and within 25mm of the car centre plane.
By stating pressure charging only for the turbine and compressor, that leaves the MGU-H capable of spooling of the compressor so long as it is not being used to create pressure. Just like Scarbs mentioned.
5.1.6 goes on to mention the MGU-H, "The shaft must be designed so as to ensure that the shaft assembly, the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity, an electrical motor generator (MGU-H) may be directly coupled to it. The shaft may not be mechanically linked to any other device.", but does not say it can effect pressure charging.
Re: Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software
Posted: 05 Oct 2018, 00:11
by NL_Fer
Tripple sensors, dual battery,
What if we are thinking the wrong way. What if the trick would be to generate some kind of AC current, while the sensor only measures DC?
A DC sensor would sense AC as 0 current.Because electrons would go in and out of the battery, be measured as a net 0 amps. But ofcourse the could be used to drive an MGU, without being counted as an energy flow.
All energy (including electrical) available to an F1 car comes from the 100Kg fuel it carries. Therefore, if expected energy use doesn't fit after fitting weights and drag coefficients into their equations, then they might conclude that the 100Kg fuel limit is being breached somehow and speculate by what mechanism the extra energy is coming in.
I did think about that. Of course that reasoning is correct. However, nobody usually calls it "energy" in that general sense. Usually we call it oil, fuel or (electric) energy. I find it more than reasonable to assume in the case of what F1today wrote, they actually meant electric energy with "energy". Usually we all do when discussing this.
Like for instance when Honda in 2005 had a secret fuel compartment, everybody called it a secret fuel tank. Nobody called a it a "secret energy compartment". Or when I eat my apple this morning: I call it eating an apple, not a fruitious energy intake.
The current formula is all about energy efficiency. Energy to drive the wheels comes from a number of sources and when outsiders (eg journalists or forum members) are trying to identify the means behind an unexplained performance improvement we are looking for the source of extra "energy" - it may not be possible to identify this as extra fuel.
All energy (including electrical) available to an F1 car comes from the 100Kg fuel it carries. Therefore, if expected energy use doesn't fit after fitting weights and drag coefficients into their equations, then they might conclude that the 100Kg fuel limit is being breached somehow and speculate by what mechanism the extra energy is coming in.
It is interesting to consider an overview of the energy storage and flows in an F1 car.
- The car starts the race with about 4.4 GJ of chemical energy on board.
- The chemical energy can be consumed at a maximum rate of 44 MJ/minute. (1200kW)
- In "self sustaining" mode the piston engine converts about 45% of this - 540kW directly to mechanical work at the crankshaft.
- In "self sustaining" mode the turbine converts about 5% of this - 60kW to mechanical work to the MGUH (after allowing for direct work to drive the compressor.)
- In "self sustaining" mode the remaining 50% - 600kW is lost as heat through the heat exchangers and exhaust.
- So about 50% of the fuel load is converted to do useful work. (Less than this because the PU is often operated at other than peak efficiency eg part load or electric supercharger mode)
- Of the energy doing useful work, some is used more than once. This is the braking energy captured by the MGUH - about 2MJ/lap depending on the track. Over 70 laps this is 140MJ - 3% of the total fuel energy or 6% of the useful work - recycled.
Interesting remarks. Especially at the 3:15 mark...'MGU-H is not allowed to produce boost, as such, so it cannot be used as an electric turbocharger'. Did I miss something?
I don't know of anything in the technical regulations that directly restricts it. However, it might be one of those things that falls under the "spirit of the rules" catch all.
I'm trying to look at the rules again and wrap my head around this. The only thing it may be is the use of the work 'effected' in a sentence that does not also include the MGU-H. This would be a big change into the way that was considered a way to get maximum power out of the PU.
From businessdictionary.com - Effected means to actually do something, to execute, produce or bring about something. It's an action word of actually doing something.
by a shaft assembly parallel to the engine crankshaft and within 25mm of the car centre plane.
By stating pressure charging only for the turbine and compressor, that leaves the MGU-H capable of spooling of the compressor so long as it is not being used to create pressure. Just like Scarbs mentioned.
5.1.6 goes on to mention the MGU-H, "The shaft must be designed so as to ensure that the shaft assembly, the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity, an electrical motor generator (MGU-H) may be directly coupled to it. The shaft may not be mechanically linked to any other device.", but does not say it can effect pressure charging.
I think the rules are being misinterpreted here. For one thing it is not possible to "spool" the compressor without creating boost. Try reading it this way:
5.1.6 Pressure charging may only be effected by the use of a sole single stage compressor and it may only be linked to (driven by) a sole single stage exhaust turbineand an electrical motor generator (MGU-H)
Interesting remarks. Especially at the 3:15 mark...'MGU-H is not allowed to produce boost, as such, so it cannot be used as an electric turbocharger'. Did I miss something?
i also thought the MGU H can be used to spin up the Turbo at low speed?
or am i getting it wrong here? please correct me
All energy (including electrical) available to an F1 car comes from the 100Kg fuel it carries. Therefore, if expected energy use doesn't fit after fitting weights and drag coefficients into their equations, then they might conclude that the 100Kg fuel limit is being breached somehow and speculate by what mechanism the extra energy is coming in.
I did think about that. Of course that reasoning is correct. However, nobody usually calls it "energy" in that general sense. Usually we call it oil, fuel or (electric) energy. I find it more than reasonable to assume in the case of what F1today wrote, they actually meant electric energy with "energy". Usually we all do when discussing this.
Like for instance when Honda in 2005 had a secret fuel compartment, everybody called it a secret fuel tank. Nobody called a it a "secret energy compartment". Or when I eat my apple this morning: I call it eating an apple, not a fruitious energy intake.
The current formula is all about energy efficiency. Energy to drive the wheels comes from a number of sources and when outsiders (eg journalists or forum members) are trying to identify the means behind an unexplained performance improvement we are looking for the source of extra "energy" - it may not be possible to identify this as extra fuel.
My point was just that the F1today.net's article is bogus and people should be careful with both the 'information' from AMuS and be careful drawing immediate conclusions from it. I agree with you for the full record; I just didn't want to start a whole polemic about the concept of energy.
All energy (including electrical) available to an F1 car comes from the 100Kg fuel it carries. Therefore, if expected energy use doesn't fit after fitting weights and drag coefficients into their equations, then they might conclude that the 100Kg fuel limit is being breached somehow and speculate by what mechanism the extra energy is coming in.
It is interesting to consider an overview of the energy storage and flows in an F1 car.
- The car starts the race with about 4.4 GJ of chemical energy on board.
- The chemical energy can be consumed at a maximum rate of 44 MJ/minute. (1200kW)
- In "self sustaining" mode the piston engine converts about 45% of this - 540kW directly to mechanical work at the crankshaft.
- In "self sustaining" mode the turbine converts about 5% of this - 60kW to mechanical work to the MGUH (after allowing for direct work to drive the compressor.)
- In "self sustaining" mode the remaining 50% - 600kW is lost as heat through the heat exchangers and exhaust.
- So about 50% of the fuel load is converted to do useful work. (Less than this because the PU is often operated at other than peak efficiency eg part load or electric supercharger mode)
- Of the energy doing useful work, some is used more than once. This is the braking energy captured by the MGUH - about 2MJ/lap depending on the track. Over 70 laps this is 140MJ - 3% of the total fuel energy or 6% of the useful work - recycled.
This is pretty informative. Its a wonderful post, thanks.
I don't agree with is the last point (energy being used more than once) - instead a portion of energy that would have been lost as heat or drop in KE is saved, but that might be what you meant.
I'm particularly interested in drive train losses in an F1 car, would you have any figures for this? Especially gearbox and differential.
