Ferrari Coupler Connections

[hardingfv32]

Any thoughts on what all the couplers are for?

1) Fuel
2) Fuel vent
3) Nitrogen for pneumatic valve system
4) Water?
5) Hydraulic fluid??

Brian

[Pierce89]

your list sounds about right, though I'm not sure about the hydraulic fluid. The water coupling I guess would be to pre-heat the engine.

[DaveKillens]

This gets into pure speculation.

There are four different sizes, obviously to avoid mixing anything. Two are identical, and colored the same, so it must be assumed they are for the same fluid, and my best guess it's water, to circulate it in warming up the powerplant, and top off the radiators. The big one might be for fuel, and the smallest one is to remove fuel. The FIA mandates that the teams must supply a point where fuel can be extracted for post-race testing, and that fits in nicely.

The color that jumps out is the one with the blue ring, and it has to be for a reason,and I'm assuming that it's because it's a gas instead of a liquid, and nitrogen.

I don't think it's common practice to think about adding oil or hydraulic fluid regularly, the oil is topped off before going on track, and if you start to lose hydraulic fluid, adding more won't solve your problem or get you to the end of the race.

[simieski]

I would be very suprised if any of these is a pneumatic connection. All the fittings are quick release couplings normally used for connection to a risbridger or other type of rig for adding or removing liquid. The nitrogen reservoir is a system that should be relatively easily replenished if required during a pit stop, looking at the panel design it is held closed by a non-captive non quick release fastener. The nitrogen replenishment fitting would most likely be something very similar to a push-on tyre inflation adaptor which would facilitate a faster replensihment time. As DaveKillens said, what each of the couplings are for is nothing but specualtion, my guess would be fuel pressure and return, water pressure and return, and take a guess between hyd, g/bow or eng oil for the last one.

[strad]

Don't think they can add oils..the blue is disconcerting..

Some common gas color codes.
Specifically named gases
Acetylene cylinders are maroon.
Argon cylinders have a dark green shoulder.
Carbon dioxide cylinders have a grey shoulder.
Chlorine cylinders have a yellow shoulder.
Helium cylinders have a brown shoulder.
Hydrogen cylinders have a red shoulder.
Nitrous oxide cylinders have a blue shoulder.
Nitrogen cylinders have a black shoulder. (Previously grey, in the United Kingdom).
Oxygen cylinders have a white shoulder. (Previously black, in the United Kingdom).

[edit] Based on gas properties
Toxic or corrosive gas cylinders have a yellow shoulder (e.g., ammonia, chlorine, fluorine, arsine, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide)
Flammable gas cylinders have a red shoulder (e.g., hydrogen, methane, ethylene, and forming gas)
Oxidising gas cylinders have a light blue shoulder (e.g., nitrous oxide, and oxygen-containing blends)
Inert (non toxic, non flammable, non oxidising) gas cylinders have a bright green shoulder (e.g., neon, krypton, and xenon)
Toxic and flammable or toxic and corrosive gas cylinders have yellow and red shoulders (either two bands or quartered).
Toxic and oxidising or corrosive and oxidising gas cylinders have yellow and light blue shoulders (either two bands or quartered).

[riff_raff]

Color codes are commonly used in aircraft fluid systems, but I don't think there are such requirements in F1. A better approach would be like the one they apparently are using. Make the dry-breaks different sizes so the wrong connector cannot be attached. More fool proof than color coding.

[aussiegman]

Brian et al, I think you've pretty well got it.

Fuel is large centre fitting
Fuel vent is small lower right
Nitrogen for pneumatics upper right with blue ring
Heated water in/out would be upper and lower left.

As there is no re-fueling during the races there is no need for larger, high flow quick release fuel fittings.

As the engines are dry sump, oil would be added to the oil tank and not into the engine. As this is not a during the race item, it can be housed where most beneficial.

The fuel sample can be removed from the fuel vent via either pressurizing the tank of vacuum to pull a sample up from the vent. There is also ability to have taps on the fuel lines nearer the rails to prevent possible "tampering" with something akin to the the Toyota WRC restrictor that tests normal but isn't.

I would be very suprised if any of these is a pneumatic connection.

Why?? I'd be surprised if the nitrogen pressure valve wasn't under the same panel as the remainder of the replenishable's so it is a) easy to locate (why make another hole in the chassis and/or bodywork when one will do and is already required) and b) easier for packaging (as previous).

During transport or during the race the nitrogen reservoir needs to stay pressurised and within easy reach so it makes sense to have it with the other feeds.

[marcush.]

for what reason would you have such a big coupling for nitrogen ??? they all are so weight conscious only to have a oversize coupler ?

[aussiegman]

for what reason would you have such a big coupling for nitrogen ??? they all are so weight conscious only to have a oversize coupler ?

I can only speculate, perhaps a flow requirement for mid race refills where speed is the primary driver.
Maybe there is an ease of use in a hurry that can be provided by using a larger fitting as well.
Longevity as the larger fitting is more robust and less likely to be damaged by a hurried and less cautious refill during a race where again speed of connection and flow is the primary driver.

I suspect that the weight of the fitting vs. a smaller one would have been considered and rated as negligible against the benefit of flow and requirement for robust connection.

In F1 as with all motorsports, decisions are usually a trade off of weight vs. usability vs. reliability

[simieski]

I would be very suprised if any of these is a pneumatic connection.

Why?? I'd be surprised if the nitrogen pressure valve wasn't under the same panel as the remainder of the replenishable's so it is a) easy to locate (why make another hole in the chassis and/or bodywork when one will do and is already required) and b) easier for packaging (as previous).

To answer your question of why, please read what I said following the statement which you quoted. If you look at the panel design, it is not quick release. It is retained by a non captive screw into an anchor nut. Keep in mind gas is the only thing that may be replenished during a race. One would expect a panel which is designed to be open as quickly as possible in a race would have something a little more efficient. The other connections serve no purpose during a race so there is no need for quick access to them, however for nitrogen this remains a possibility. With reference to flow rates etc, please consider the nitrogen reservoir is relatively small, approximately half a litre, it would not require anything more than a tyre valve and push on fitting to inflate it very quickly. With the self sealing coupling you normally have a collar to pull back, push the fitting on, release the collar then pressurise the line. With a push on the line is already pressurised, no collars to mess about with.

[aussiegman]

To answer your question of why, please read what I said following the statement which you quoted.

Funnily enough, I actually did read it the first time. And the second. Perhaps you should take your own advice.

Did you read what others including myself wrote?? You seem unable to grasp that another person might have a contrary point of view to your own. Is your opinion the ONLY possible solution or answer?? Perhaps a check on some of the condescending attitude might help....

As such, it is the case here that I have a contrary view and do not agree with some of your assumptions given my experiences in other forms of motorsport, hence my previous comment. However in order to satiate your need for detail, below is an more intricate response.

If you look at the panel design, it is not quick release. It is retained by a non captive screw into an anchor nut.

Yes, I saw that the first and second time, thank you for pointing it out a third. So these are not quick release fittings, what's your point??

Keep in mind gas is the only thing that may be replenished during a race.

Yes, nitrogen or possibly another gas is the only replenishable.

However, this leads into a larger point in that most decisions made in designing and running a race vehicle are a compromise or trade off, something I eluded to in my previous post.

IMHO Ferrari have made a judgement call in trading weight saving for robustness and a small efficiency window that may only ever be utilised in an emergency situation that is likely indicative of a larger issue. As such, any perceived small gain in efficiency provides no significant or minimal advantage that is not enough to warrant the extra weight and complexity of a secondary quick release fitting.

From my point of view, IF there was a need to replenish the nitrogen mid race, there is likely a bigger issue, so having a separate quick release tap for a very small likelihood event of a mid race fill up might not be the highest priority. If the nitrogen pressure was to drop, the best option maybe retire the car rather than risk the engine, unless they could justify/quantify the risk vs reward. As such why provide the added complexity, weight and introduce another point of failure for such an infinitesimally small and likely never utilised comparative advantage??

One would expect a panel which is designed to be open as quickly as possible in a race would have something a little more efficient.

So is this the royal "one", kind of like the royal "we"??? Or do you usually refer to yourself in such a manner?? This should read "I" as in you, simieski expect...You cannot possibly assume to speak for others in such a manner. So "YOU" expect based on your own observations, experience and suppositions, nothing more.

The other connections serve no purpose during a race so there is no need for quick access to them, however for nitrogen this remains a possibility.

Yes, but they are still important pre-race where time is absolutely an element, especially when on the grid or in the garage during qualifying. Additionally, post race is an issue where time efficiency is also an element to ensurer engines are properly serviced to maintain appropriate cooling down periods in a timely manner of transport.

So again, what exactly is your point?? You feel they should have buried the access panel under the car perhaps as during the pre and post race time periods, mechanics be damned??

Use during a race for nitrogen replenishment would seem to present a very small possibility and as such not a high priority but a very tertiary consideration behind other more favored aspects of efficiency and longevity.

As such,it is would seem they (Ferrari) have simply undertaken a risk/benefit type analysis as is typical in such situations and perhaps NOT provided a quick release fitting for nitrogen replenishment under this panel, if at all.

Why? The risk it presented was deemed greater than the reward offered when all aspects of the problem were considered.

I am not sure you have considered all aspects of the issue to hand, which "one" should always do.

With reference to flow rates etc, please consider the nitrogen reservoir is relatively small, approximately half a litre, it would not require anything more than a tyre valve and push on fitting to inflate it very quickly.

Yes, again this is well understood however you are not looking at the holistic package!!!

The fitting may serve a primary purpose other than as a quick nitrogen replenishment during a race which is deemed as a secondary use and not its primary purpose. As such, it is designed more concentric to its primary purpose and in so doing it maybe required to be more robust than a simple "tyre valve push on fitting" in order to achieve both functions.

As has been said, teams are typically careful not to introduce unwarranted weight and complexity as well as take great pains avoid increasing potential points of failure. Simply put, why have two fittings when one will do.

A stronger fitting might be 25% heavier than a single fitting, but it is 50% lighter than two as well as reducing hose and other fitting weights required for multiple access ports. This weight saving is coupled with removing another whole potential system of failure points to ruin a race.

A simple risk benefit analysis may have led to a single more robust fitting with an acceptable risk of time penalty should it ever be used, as that usage was deemed an extremely low probability event.

With the self sealing coupling you normally have a collar to pull back, push the fitting on, release the collar then pressurise the line. With a push on the line is already pressurised, no collars to mess about with.

OK, thanks for the "Quick Release for Dummies" recap. Please read above and try to understand that perhaps the primary driver was not quick release/connection after analysis was done but to fulfill both a primary and secondary objectives and reduce overall risk profile of the system.

One must always be careful in One's analysis of individual systems so as to not forget the whole.

So to sum up as I see it:

1: The extra weight of tubing, fittings etc vs. an already present screw type fitting which is placed in an already present easy access panel presents less of an increase in weight and complexity over another separate quick release quick connect nitrogen access port which introduces multiple fittings as well as another hole in the body/chassis.

2: This single system / multiple use connection reduces weight system

3: This single system / multiple use connection reduces complexity and potential points of failure

4: During transport, an external nitrogen feed is often secured to the stripped and packaged chassis to ensure pressures remain high enough in the pneumatic valve system to prevent de-pressurisation and valves "dropping" into the engine where they may touch the piston crowns.

5: As you yourself said, the reservoir is typically small at around 0.5Lt, so a screw type fitting which provides a stronger and more positive connection than one which is much more inclined to be "knocked off" or fail such as a quick release fitting such as those previously utilized for air jacks etc is preferred. An easy on/easy off connection is not a robust long term connection acceptable for transport usage

6: A risk benefit analysis may have lead to the decision that a separate quick release coupler was not warranted and as such, they reduce the risk of failure, increasing the reward of reliability against the small benefit of possibly needing to save 4 seconds using a screw type fitting once in 2 or 3 seasons during an event that is likely indicative of a larger problem that could potentially lead to an engine failure and the associated penalties.

You can agree or disagree, but maybe you should try to be a little less condescending your One-ness...

[bhall]

Just to make things more interesting.

All cars must be fitted with a –2 'Symetrics' male fitting in order to facilitate fuel sampling. If an electric pump on board the car cannot be used to remove the fuel an externally connected one may be used provided it is evident that a representative fuel sample is being taken. If an external pump is used it must be possible to connect the FIA sampling hose to it and any hose between the car and pump must be -3 in diameter and not exceed 2m in length. Details of the fuel sampling hose may be found in the Appendix to these regulations.

[Cam]

+1 for the close up and the effort gone to sourcing that. Nice job.

[bhall]

It would be a lot easier if I knew what the hell to look up. But, I don't know what query will yield the desired results.

There's a picture around here somewhere of the F2012's engine cover with the small panel near the FIAT logo removed. There's a connection of some sort in it that I think looks like it has more to do with pneumatics than anything seen in any photo in this thread. I just can't find it.

[Cam]

I've used something similar as a loopback device. It takes a path that normally goes out and send it back in. Could this be close?

Edit: it's not a sample device is it? Traps some kind of fluid or gas?