F1technical.net

toraabe wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 10:39

At least Ferrari seems to be down on power. Actually good. Punishment to themself..

I think its the opposite: they have found a gigatonne of torque over the winter and are play-acting as defeated weaklings until they unleash its Melbourne and win by 2 laps!

Why do I say this. Their customers never complained one peep about a weak engine. I know ferrari has them by the balls unlike the other engine makers and their customers... But we should have at least heard a tiny complaint I think.

PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 17:15

toraabe wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 10:39

At least Ferrari seems to be down on power. Actually good. Punishment to themself..

I think its the opposite: they have found a gigatonne of torque over the winter and are play-acting as defeated weaklings until they unleash its Melbourne and win by 2 laps!

Why do I say this. Their customers never complained one peep about a weak engine. I know ferrari has them by the balls unlike the other engine makers and their customers... But we should have at least heard a tiny complaint I think.

It's interesting for me, if Haas / Alfa Romeo had no complaints after the US Grand Prix, does this mean that Ferrari used tricks only on own engine? If so, were the engines structurally different for customers and for SF90? If not, why would a Ferrari have to build a completely new 2020 engine (according to AMuS)?

probably not, physically the same engine but if they did not inform the customer teams how to optimize fuel flow (as that was likely the thing outside regulations) the customers just had a good engine, but missing those last 50hp that could be used now and then (or if over fueled outside declaration more often).

Now that that has been clamped down on Ferrari seems to have built a totally new engine (likely no longer optimized for temporary higher peak power). So they will lose that peak power (if the clampdown is ok) but perhaps they can reclaim some of the HP they lose by that as they now optimize their engine (hybrid assistance, mapping, turbo geometry etc.) again for normal fuel flow limits.

news from Italy.

According to Leo Turrini, and many others, there was a whristleblower in Ferrari giving tech spec to an other team. Then the team gave those infos (under patent..) to the FIA per the protest: if Ferrari would have been claimed guilty, Ferrari could have taken legal action and win just because those infos (under patent) were given to a competitor violating the patent rules and not to the FIA itself.

So the agreement is aimed at protecting Ferrari patents and possible damages to the FIA, for violation of the patents themselves (Ferrari can act legally against FIA, the whristleblower, the team which have contacts with the whristleblower)

2007 McLaren anyone?

Sieper wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:11

probably not, physically the same engine but if they did not inform the customer teams how to optimize fuel flow (as that was likely the thing outside regulations) the customers just had a good engine, but missing those last 50hp that could be used now and then (or if over fueled outside declaration more often).

Now that that has been clamped down on Ferrari seems to have built a totally new engine (likely no longer optimized for temporary higher peak power). So they will lose that peak power (if the clampdown is ok) but perhaps they can reclaim some of the HP they lose by that as they now optimize their engine (hybrid assistance, mapping, turbo geometry etc.) again for normal fuel flow limits.

every Pu is new and redesigned for 2020 just for the new 0,3lper100km in race limit in the oil consumption... so every Pu is new!

Polite wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:34

news from Italy.

According to Leo Turrini, and many others, there was a whristleblower in Ferrari giving tech spec to an other team. Then the team gave those infos (under patent..) to the FIA per the protest: if Ferrari would have been claimed guilty, Ferrari could have taken legal action and win just because those infos (under patent) were given to a competitor violating the patent rules and not to the FIA itself.

So the agreement is aimed at protecting Ferrari patents and possible damages to the FIA, for violation of the patents themselves (Ferrari can act legally against FIA, the whristleblower, the team which have contacts to the whristleblower)

2007 McLaren anyone?

If true, this is what's usually called a twist

Power unit. Customer teams are supplied with same hardware and software.

Polite wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:34

news from Italy.

According to Leo Turrini, and many others, there was a whristleblower in Ferrari giving tech spec to an other team. Then the team gave those infos (under patent..) to the FIA per the protest: if Ferrari would have been claimed guilty, Ferrari could have taken legal action and win just because those infos (under patent) were given to a competitor violating the patent rules and not to the FIA itself.

So the agreement is aimed at protecting Ferrari patents and possible damages to the FIA, for violation of the patents themselves (Ferrari can act legally against FIA, the whristleblower, the team which have contacts with the whristleblower)

2007 McLaren anyone?

What’s the patent number? I’m surprised it would be patented because therefore the invention would be made public.

subcritical71 wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 21:03

Polite wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:34

news from Italy.
According to Leo Turrini, and many others, there was a whristleblower in Ferrari giving tech spec to an other team. Then the team gave those infos (under patent..) to the FIA per the protest: if Ferrari would have been claimed guilty, Ferrari could have taken legal action and win just because those infos (under patent) were given to a competitor violating the patent rules and not to the FIA itself.
So the agreement is aimed at protecting Ferrari patents and possible damages to the FIA, for violation of the patents themselves (Ferrari can act legally against FIA, the whristleblower, the team which have contacts with the whristleblower)
2007 McLaren anyone?

What’s the patent number? I’m surprised it would be patented because therefore the invention would be made public.

If it was patented then surely the information is indeed public? In that case, why the problem in making that information about the "cheat" public?

Also, if this is the case, how could Ferrari sue anyone, if the patent isn't being used in a commercial product? Anyone can talk about and use patented technology freely, if they are not making money from it. Wouldn't it being patented actually help the FIA out? They'd be able to publicise what the patent is that Ferrari were using as part of their "cheat".

Agree with others here, the "patent" line makes little sense to me. Maybe he meant "commercially sensitive" which could apply just to the F1 division (and not the road car one), but it is the kind of defense of secrecy I could imagine one giving.

Polite wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:34

news from Italy.

According to Leo Turrini, and many others, there was a whristleblower in Ferrari giving tech spec to an other team. Then the team gave those infos (under patent..) to the FIA per the protest: if Ferrari would have been claimed guilty, Ferrari could have taken legal action and win just because those infos (under patent) were given to a competitor violating the patent rules and not to the FIA itself.

So the agreement is aimed at protecting Ferrari patents and possible damages to the FIA, for violation of the patents themselves (Ferrari can act legally against FIA, the whristleblower, the team which have contacts with the whristleblower)

2007 McLaren anyone?

Lol, Leo depends on his Ferrari sources, and this time he's had to play along to help out. This story makes me think of Max Mosley being caught with 5 prostitutes being completely ridiculous, and his story was 'somebody' set him up, hoping that mysteriously that made it less actually him! There's no whistleblower, the other teams just had enough clues and data

And Ferrari have to help FIA with their procedures and whatnot, as a penalty, that nails it as getting caught being naughty. Clever, but naughty.

So now, have Ferrari made a weak engine, suddenly? i don't think so. That idea is part of the story, like they're suffering terribly and natural justice is being done even if FIA are 99% letting them off. The whole thing happened from being clever, that hasn't gone away has it, and if we get Oz they'll be right there i'm betting

Once upon a time: according ex FERRARI mastermind/technical director Ross Brawn one item at the very top of priorities of a formula one team is knowing what the others (the competition is doing or what they are up-too). In F1 there is no such thing as a ‘patented development’. On the contrary, everybody does all they can to hide developments from others. But, the special knowledge and skills plus findings that an employee has learned on the job are considered to be a company’s proprietary information. Trade secrets act. The term trade secrets:- all forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic, or engineering information including pattern, plans, completions, program or Godes,
whether tangible or intangible, techniques, processes, procedures, programs. Or Godes, whether tangible, and whether or how stored, compiled, or memorialized physically photographically, or in writing.

This Turrini theory would mean that some team would have given stolen information they had straight from Ferrari to the FIA in order to prove that they're "cheating", right? They would admit that they made themselves guilty of espionage - of course one could argue that in order to avoid that they would just ask for clarification on a general idea, not the exact technical solution they knew existed on the italian PU, but how could anyone, including Ferrari, prove that they actually had the information from a source within Ferrari, if they never mentioned the exact technical solution, which supposedly lead to the deal in the first place?

Another layer is that the "patented tech spec" in that scenario would have to be illegal in order to warrant any deal (FIA doesn't penalize Ferrari, Ferrari doesn't sue FIA etc) - if it was legal then Ferrari wouldn't have done anything wrong and would have 100% tried to --- over whoever got their hands on their totally patended totally legal "tech spec" ...

This theory is quite far fetched imho

The patent story is silly.

Renault famously patented their working pneumatic valve design back when everyone else was struggling with the seals. Shortly after all engines on the grid had more or less the same seal arrangement since Renault carelessly included many detailed cross section views.

If I am not mistaken this is the very patent:
https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0646700A2/en

Polite wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:35

Sieper wrote: ↑

03 Mar 2020, 18:11

probably not, physically the same engine but if they did not inform the customer teams how to optimize fuel flow (as that was likely the thing outside regulations) the customers just had a good engine, but missing those last 50hp that could be used now and then (or if over fueled outside declaration more often).

Now that that has been clamped down on Ferrari seems to have built a totally new engine (likely no longer optimized for temporary higher peak power). So they will lose that peak power (if the clampdown is ok) but perhaps they can reclaim some of the HP they lose by that as they now optimize their engine (hybrid assistance, mapping, turbo geometry etc.) again for normal fuel flow limits.

every Pu is new and redesigned for 2020 just for the new 0,3lper100km in race limit in the oil consumption... so every Pu is new!

And max 0.25 lt of fuel allowed outside of the cell instead of 2 lt.