They might neuter ERS, too

[xpensive]

Believe me, this is the loophole they are about to close;

5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the exhaust turbine of a pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched.

[FW17]

Believe me, this is the loophole they are about to close;

5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the exhaust turbine of a pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched.

What do you think is happening?

[dren]

What is the clutch allowing, other than clutching of course?

[WALL_ZACK]

I'm curious how that contributes to the Merc HP advantage? Doesn't MGU-H just harvest and keep the turbine at optimum rpm? Is the clutching part allowing them to output to something other than the turbine or harvest more energy? Where's the loophole?

[xpensive]

I think what they do with the split-turbo they are double-clutching,

- First releasing the turbine at rapid spool-up with the MGU-H, allowing log-exhaust to make miles in the packaging.

- Then releasing the compressor at lift-off, avoiding stalling the turbine to get all inertia power to the MGU-H.

Nobody can compete with that, you have the 160 Hp MGU-K everywhere.

[knabbel]

As far as I know is there no clutch allowed between turbine and compressor??


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 line. 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.

[xpensive]

As far as I know is there no clutch allowed between turbine and compressor??

Where does it say its not?

[knabbel]

See my edit: "the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity"

[xpensive]

See my edit: "the compressor and the turbine always rotate about a common axis and at the same angular velocity"

This is why with the split-turbo, which was unforeseen, the rules need clarification, which will come now.

[Juzh]

Good points xpensive.

[Juzh]

Didn't they have some of their more aggressive qualifying engine maps outlawed mid season in the blown diffuser era? What about the mass damper being outlawed for Renault? I think there's precedent for this kind of knee-jerk "correction" mid season so I wouldn't be surprised. Disappointed, but not surprised...

For Red Bull did they not just ban it for one race, i.e. Silverstone?

With Renault it´s the same messed up reactions from the FIA when they should have waited until after the season.
Thankfully Renault harvested their success that year.

And funnily enough, it was banned at the German GP which happened to be the Hockenheim track.

First they introduced a ban on extreme engine mapping in valencia (or rather you had to run them during the race as well, which effectively forced teams not to run them), then in silverstone they banned off throttle ebd all together (with various parameters allowed for each engine lol). After silverstone regs returned to pre-valencia spec. So everything was allowed, along with Q3 engine mapping.

[Holm86]

Good points xpensive.

Why is that good points?? The regulations clearly says that the turbine and compressor most rotate at the same angular velocity. Having split turbo's does'nt change that. I dont see how a double clutch would fit into the regulations.

[xpensive]

It didn't, the 5.2.4 clutch was a loophole contradicting 5.1.6 when applied to a split-turbo, why the rules needed to be clarified.

Simple as that.

[Cold Fussion]

I really don't get the 110 - 130 hp advantage? Isn't ERS only allowed to pump 160 hp into the System?

If so are Renault and Ferrari running with Kindergarden Calculators as ERS Units or why should they only have 30 - 50 hp from ERS?

You're allowed 4 MJ a lap from the ERS to the MGU-K, with the MGU-K being limited to 120 KW. There's no limit on energy transfer from the MGU-H to MGU-K, apart from the 120 KW limit of the MGU-K. Over a race distance I could imagine the Mercedes unit could have a substantial average power advantage, but I would have thought that over a single qualifying lap the 4 MJ limit would have been sufficient, but clearly it isn't.

[RicME85]

What are Mercedes doing differently to Williams seeing as they have the same engine how can Massa be complaining or Merc trickery? Is it just a case of they know their tech better?