F1technical.net

Ferrari's 2015 engine may feature a split turbo like Mercedes' - they already have a split turbo, but the distance between compressor and turbine is only the length of the MGU.

kooleracer wrote:According to AMuS the 2015 Ferrari powerunit will feature a split turbo design like Mercedes. So hopefully next year with Allison at the helm and a better engine and chasis design Ferrari can atleast be in the hunt like Red Bull and Williams were this year.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 12004.html In German

Edit, quoted wrong post

I heard a rumor that the Honda PU is split turbo with an air-to-air intercooler with it's intake in the top scoop behind the drivers head.

Honda always liked air-to air intercoolers because of less piping and no need for a cooler or coolant.(less weight and more simple=faster laptimes and less things that can break).

My guesses it will be air-liquid.

Sasha wrote:I heard a rumor that the Honda PU is split turbo with an air-to-air intercooler with it's intake in the top scoop behind the drivers head.

Honda always liked air-to air intercoolers because of less piping and no need for a cooler or coolant.(less weight and more simple=faster laptimes and less things that can break).

An air to air intercooler would be too large to put somewhere that it could be fed from the roll-bar inlet. And teh CoG will be too high.

The liquid air intercooler offers a smaller radiator area exposed to the air stream and allows for shorter ducting from compressor to inlet, improving response. The downside is weight. The cars are already carrying coolant for the engine and ES, so for a liquid to air intercooler would be no great impost, especially if it can do double duty with one of the others.

That is what I'm thinking is air-to-coolant intercooler.

A technical question.......With the compressor in the front of the engine and away from the heat and very close to the cylinder heads(very short piping).
How big would of an air-to-air intercooler would be needed.......1/2 the size or less of what would be needed if the compressor was in the rear of the engine?

Sasha wrote:That is what I'm thinking is air-to-coolant intercooler.

A technical question.......With the compressor in the front of the engine and away from the heat and very close to the cylinder heads(very short piping).
How big would of an air-to-air intercooler would be needed.......1/2 the size or less of what would be needed if the compressor was in the rear of the engine?

I wouldn't think that makes much of a difference.

Guessing maybe 5-10%. Anybody?

Less than 5%.

Sasha wrote:That is what I'm thinking is air-to-coolant intercooler.

A technical question.......With the compressor in the front of the engine and away from the heat and very close to the cylinder heads(very short piping).
How big would of an air-to-air intercooler would be needed.......1/2 the size or less of what would be needed if the compressor was in the rear of the engine?

The vast majority of the heat addition to the air stream is from the compression and not from the radiation of the engine block and other hot components. Look at how a heat exchanger is constructed and compare that to a 'normal' turbo installation and you'll quickly see that it is a poor heat exchanger.

What are you guys talking about?
You can have the air inlet to the turbo at the roll hoop and have the air to air intercooler in the side pod, which is quite typical. I'm not sure of the difficulty rationalizing that?

I am interested to see if Ferrari switch to air to air. As it has shown by them and Lotus than air to water wasn't the best option. Too much weight, high COG among other drawbacks. I wasn't surprised it was a dead end.

In another hand, the best car this year uses a water-air intercooler
Maybe Ferrari undersized its intercooler too much in order to place it in the engine's V.
Arguably Mercedes placed it in a cavity in the monocoque, very close to the compressor.

Also heard Renault and Ferrari are behind on their 2015 PU!

And that is one of the major reasons they want more tokens or have spec locked later than Feb.

It looks like they didn't decide on the split-turbo until Summer.Renault is so behind they might not have the split-turbo PU ready in time for homogation in Febuary.

That might be why Horner has been crying for a twin turbo V6 with spec hybrid system for 2016.He states for cost but behind close doors they state they can't catch up to Mercedes even with a 48% change to this year PU.(needs new heads,turbo,exhaust,ERS).

IF AMuS is the source, then it's BS IMO. They are quite reliable but their last article about Renault and Ferrari is full of BS IMHO.
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 12004.html

People keep stating that the Mercedes split-turbo is the major reason for their performance lead.

But people from the Mercedes camp state that is wrong,it does help but isn't the major reason why,there are a 100 other things we did better than the others.
It is more for packaging than power.(better balance of the chassis and shorter exhaust route to turbine)

Power... look more at the bigger turbine.The Mercedes PU can turn their MGU-H more during the lap without hurting ICE performance.

Exhaust....more compact,shorter route to turbine,with less heat excape to turn that big turbine=turn the MGU-H more to produce more e-power with-out hurting ICE power.

Heads and injection/control....early combustion with-out knock/detonation to get max power and better MPG.

Blackout wrote:IF AMuS is the source, then it's BS IMO. They are quite reliable but their last article about Renault and Ferrari is full of BS IMHO.
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 12004.html

Which parts are BS?

AMuS says Renault started the 2015 project/fired up the engine in august while Renault states it was in July. And AMuS keeps repeating the same old ''information'': The RS34 vibrates too much and has many other mechanical defaults while people inside and outside Renault rubbished that claim log time ago.*

AMuS is fairly realible but is stubborn. They also keep claiming that the Lotus austin nose and F41T are 2015 legal, for example. : P Even if 273 people have technicaly demonstrated that they are not legal.

Yes @Sasha, The split-turbo layout just triggers a 'snowball'' effect and has so many positive repercutions on many areas of the car, packaging etc... on paper. Obviously Mercedes also supplements it with some nice technical solutions in order to maximise its contribution, like their intercooler positionning...