Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[saviour stivala]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

[turbof1]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

The official flow chart does not show that:

(it is the 2014 chart without the mention of the sensors. Those are on the most recent official chart)

Energy transfer between K and H is stated to be unlimited. And between ES and H is also unlimited. If we were naïve individuals, based on this flow chart you could say "screw ES to K, I am just going to use ES to H to K which is unlimited". Again this is surely not happening, but it's not because of the presented flow chart.

Again what the sensor measure is not enough on its own as a limiting regulation. You can hang a sensor of how much time the driver waves to the public, but I'd still need a regulation to limit his waves to 5 times each race. The sensors you are putting forward surely measure up to ensure everybody is keeping to the regulations; that's not the point of debate here. The point is: the regulation that forbids K generated and stored energy to be unlimited used through the H unit is not on the flow chart and not in the technical regulations. Others have debated this is effectively a possibility; I myself think "yeah, this is in a technical directive probably even before 2014".

So for the record: I am not debating you that they are can bipass the 4MJ limit. I fully agree they cannot. I am debating you that it is not because of the chart.

[dans79]

The diagram even says unlimited on it.....

[saviour stivala]

That’s a bit better, as you have bothered to respond. re you referring me to here and there, I have followed all you recommended when it happened. I have been involved in the TJI combustion system claim to being used in F1 from the beginning the original pusher pushed this grandee speculation out, that was actually after he first pushed out the use of HCCI, and when on his forum I asked him if he believes a system that requires VVT and more than one injector was compatible with F1 rules, he first went to ANDY COWELL asking if they are using it, and when told no, he came out and said that it was not HCCI that was being used but TJI (his words), when again I asked him if he considers TJI that containing an injector and spark plug in a pre-combustion chamber and injecting and igniting the charge in a pre-combustion chamber was compatible with the direct injection rules, his answer was very simple, I was blocked from on his forum. We are here talking about what is regarded as a top notch F1 technical advisor to a popular broadcaster. My opinion to this day, and that is now some years after Mahle TJI combustion system was pushed out as being used in F1 is still the same as back then, it is not compatible with F1 rules. If a system of similar principle but still starts combustion in a pre-combustion chamber is claimed of being in use, I am still of the opinion that such a system is not compatible with rules.

That's fair, do you think that there is no type of pre-chamber being used in F1?

What do you think of this bit of the regulations?
5.1.11 An insert within a PU component is a minimal, non-dismountable part whose function is solely to locally support a function of this component. The total volume of inserts within the component cannot be more than 10% of the total volume of the component.

Doesn't this sort of pre-suppose that there's a pre-chamber? If I'm reading this right it's saying that the pre-chamber is limited to 10% of the CC volume?

There's a lot of questions I probably won't get the answers to.

The fuel injection rule (must be direct injection) leaves no leeway for interpretation. The fuel injection must take place in the space above the piston. I know of no pre-combustion system were fuel and or spark doesn’t take place inside it/were combustion is not started inside it. A pre-combustion chamber of 10 cc or 1 cc is still a pre-combustion chamber. and Godlameroso, how can i think that there is a pre-combustion chamber being used in F1?

[saviour stivala]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

The official flow chart does not show that:
http://static.sportskeeda.com/wp-conten ... 24x606.jpg
Energy transfer between K and H is stated to be unlimited. And between ES and H is also unlimited. If we were naïve individuals, based on this flow chart you could say "screw ES to K, I am just going to use ES to H to K which is unlimited". Again this is surely not happening, but it's not because of the presented flow chart.

Again what the sensor measure is not enough on its own as a limiting regulation. You can hang a sensor of how much time the driver waves to the public, but I'd still need a regulation to limit his waves to 5 times each race. The sensors you are putting forward surely measure up to ensure everybody is keeping to the regulations; that's not the point of debate here. The point is: the regulation that forbids K generated and stored energy to be unlimited used through the H unit is not on the flow chart and not in the technical regulations. Others have debated this is effectively a possibility; I myself think "yeah, this is in a technical directive probably even before 2014".

The official flow chart you show show unlimitted flow from "H" to "K" but it also shows a limitted max of 120kw from "k" to cranckshaft. to see it more clearly google "fia 2014 formula one power unit regulations" scroll down to "power unit energy flow legend engine ERS car (flow chart)". and see for yourself that "K" IN and OUT flow is limmited regardless what is thrown at it unlimitted.

[turbof1]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

The official flow chart does not show that:
http://static.sportskeeda.com/wp-conten ... 24x606.jpg
Energy transfer between K and H is stated to be unlimited. And between ES and H is also unlimited. If we were naïve individuals, based on this flow chart you could say "screw ES to K, I am just going to use ES to H to K which is unlimited". Again this is surely not happening, but it's not because of the presented flow chart.

Again what the sensor measure is not enough on its own as a limiting regulation. You can hang a sensor of how much time the driver waves to the public, but I'd still need a regulation to limit his waves to 5 times each race. The sensors you are putting forward surely measure up to ensure everybody is keeping to the regulations; that's not the point of debate here. The point is: the regulation that forbids K generated and stored energy to be unlimited used through the H unit is not on the flow chart and not in the technical regulations. Others have debated this is effectively a possibility; I myself think "yeah, this is in a technical directive probably even before 2014".

The official flow chart you show show unlimitted flow from "H" to "K" but it also shows a limitted max of 120kw from "k" to cranckshaft. to see it more clearly google "fia 2014 formula one power unit regulations" scroll down to "power unit energy flow legend engine ERS car (flow chart)". and see for yourself that "K" IN and OUT flow is limmited regardless what is thrown at it unlimitted.

2 remarks on that:

-The 120kw is about power and not energy. 4MJ is 33.33s of 120kw of power, but nothing is stopping you from using more energy to sustain the 120kw of power over a longer period of time, so for 35, 40, 45,... s of 120kw of power. The opposite is also true, where you a lap consists of less then 33.33s on throttle, meaning you practically are not allowed to deploy 4MJ!
-Energy is also used to drive the mgu-h to spool up the turbo, which reduces or eliminates turbo lag.

The flow chart I presented above (http://static.sportskeeda.com/wp-conten ... 24x606.jpg) is the official one and is actually from 2014 (and is probably even the chart you mean). It is a straight copy from the technical regulations pdf. No need to search for it when I already have it . Interestingly, the most up to date chart contains the regulations about the sensors, and not the one from 2014.

see for yourself that "K" IN and OUT flow is limmited regardless what is thrown at it unlimitted.

I am not 100% sure what you mean with this. If you are suggesting that the ES-K energy exchange limits apply on the H-K energy exchange limits, then they don't based on the flow chart. If you mean something else, then do please clarify.

[wuzak]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

There is no sensor between the MGUK and the crankshaft.

A sensor measures the power going to, or out of, the MGUK (Volts and Amps) in the electrical circuit. An efficiency factor 95% for the electrical power to the MGUK means that a more efficient motor will give a few more hp (if it is 98% then the MGUK will deliver approximately 5hp more than the nominal amount).

The MGUK is mechanically fixed to the crankshaft, so no need to measure power there.

[Mr.G]

Hi I'm reading trough this discussion for a few days now and what I see is that some people have issues with understanding some terms and principes... So I would like to simplify some of them for better imagination/understanding...

MGU-K
- imagine this as another smaller engine
- when the regulations says that MGU-K is limited to 120kW it means that the engine cannot deliver more kW (or hp, 120kW = ~160hp) to the crankshaft
- if this wasn't limited, teams would be trying to build more powerful MGU-K (200kW, 300kW,...)
- this doesn't say for how long you can use this engine, it just say how powerful (strong) it can be build

ES
- imagine this as the gas tank for the "smaller engine" (MGU-K)

4MJ limit
- this limiting how much fuel you can pump from your gas tank (ES) to the additional engine (MGU-K)
- so if you go full throttle you will burn all your gas in 33sec (if your ES is capable of 4MJ and if your MGU-K is able fo deliver 120kW (160hp))
- but when you decide to go half throttle, you will deliver only half of the power (60kW) but for double of the time (66sec)

MGU-H
- imagine this as gas station for the small gas tank (ES) for small engine (MGU-K)

unlimited flow
- usually you feed the small engine (MGU-K) from your gas tank (ES) and you are limited by the volume (4MJ)
- however the regulations says, that you can have a direct piping from your gas station (MGU-H) without any volume limitation (more MJ)...
- so in this case you can run your additional engine (MGU-K) for longer at full power, therefore you will deploy more energy (MJ) but you can never come with more power (120kW)

[henry]

Good one that henry, you responded to my post on this here discussion forum and said what you had to say, but pronto and tipo spinto declares "no further discussion required".

That’s an interesting use of language there. Don’t try to be too clever or you’ll give the game away.

It doesnt matter, there is nothing hidden, that's the same as "spiritopronto"

I’m not sure you understand.

[godlameroso]

That’s a bit better, as you have bothered to respond. re you referring me to here and there, I have followed all you recommended when it happened. I have been involved in the TJI combustion system claim to being used in F1 from the beginning the original pusher pushed this grandee speculation out, that was actually after he first pushed out the use of HCCI, and when on his forum I asked him if he believes a system that requires VVT and more than one injector was compatible with F1 rules, he first went to ANDY COWELL asking if they are using it, and when told no, he came out and said that it was not HCCI that was being used but TJI (his words), when again I asked him if he considers TJI that containing an injector and spark plug in a pre-combustion chamber and injecting and igniting the charge in a pre-combustion chamber was compatible with the direct injection rules, his answer was very simple, I was blocked from on his forum. We are here talking about what is regarded as a top notch F1 technical advisor to a popular broadcaster. My opinion to this day, and that is now some years after Mahle TJI combustion system was pushed out as being used in F1 is still the same as back then, it is not compatible with F1 rules. If a system of similar principle but still starts combustion in a pre-combustion chamber is claimed of being in use, I am still of the opinion that such a system is not compatible with rules.

That's fair, do you think that there is no type of pre-chamber being used in F1?

What do you think of this bit of the regulations?
5.1.11 An insert within a PU component is a minimal, non-dismountable part whose function is solely to locally support a function of this component. The total volume of inserts within the component cannot be more than 10% of the total volume of the component.

Doesn't this sort of pre-suppose that there's a pre-chamber? If I'm reading this right it's saying that the pre-chamber is limited to 10% of the CC volume?

There's a lot of questions I probably won't get the answers to.

The fuel injection rule (must be direct injection) leaves no leeway for interpretation. The fuel injection must take place in the space above the piston. I know of no pre-combustion system were fuel and or spark doesn’t take place inside it/were combustion is not started inside it. A pre-combustion chamber of 10 cc or 1 cc is still a pre-combustion chamber. and Godlameroso, how can i think that there is a pre-combustion chamber being used in F1?

How else would the be achieving such combustion efficiency? Again I don't know what combustion tricks they're using. It could be just as you say, a conventional direct injector over the piston crown with a spark plug next to it. Honda for a fact placed their injector on the exhaust side of the head, Mercedes perhaps as well.

What kind of combustion process do you think Ferrari is using? Do you think just bumping up the compression ratio is enough?

[saviour stivala]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

There is no sensor between the MGUK and the crankshaft.

A sensor measures the power going to, or out of, the MGUK (Volts and Amps) in the electrical circuit. An efficiency factor 95% for the electrical power to the MGUK means that a more efficient motor will give a few more hp (if it is 98% then the MGUK will deliver approximately 5hp more than the nominal amount).

The MGUK is mechanically fixed to the crankshaft, so no need to measure power there.

I did not say there is a sensor between "K" and crankshaft, i said there is a sensor on the "k" that measure flow out of MGU-K either out to crankshaft or in to ERS components. and this measuring sensor will register if the limitted flow imposed by the regulations are not being broken.

[Mr.G]

With a mandated flow measuring sensor on the “K” that measures flow (IN) from the “K” to ERS components, and flow (OUT) from the “K” to the crankshaft. And the FIA official flow chart (link I posted) clearly marking flow from “K” IN and OUT as being LIMITTED, there is no way that these 2 flows can be more than that stipulated by the rules, it is useless suggesting flow routes and saying unlimited this and unlimited that because whatever is thrown at the “K” cannot pass IN or OUT OF the “K” any bigger than that permitted.

There is no sensor between the MGUK and the crankshaft.

A sensor measures the power going to, or out of, the MGUK (Volts and Amps) in the electrical circuit. An efficiency factor 95% for the electrical power to the MGUK means that a more efficient motor will give a few more hp (if it is 98% then the MGUK will deliver approximately 5hp more than the nominal amount).

The MGUK is mechanically fixed to the crankshaft, so no need to measure power there.

I did not say there is a sensor between "K" and crankshaft, i said there is a sensor on the "k" that measure flow out of MGU-K either out to crankshaft or in to ERS components. and this measuring sensor will register if the limitted flow imposed by the regulations are not being broken.

The sensor (probably bi-directional current sensor) will be placed between ES and MGU-K not between MGU-K and MGU-H as you won't be able to distinguish the flow from ES to MGU-K and vice versa.

[PhillipM]

But that sensor and limit is only from the ES, any energy it sees from the MGU-H isn't included in that, only the max power output, not energy.

[Sepehr87]

Have you discovered mysterious Ferrari's "free energy" after all?
I don't understand tech stuffs you are speaking here.

[saviour stivala]

That's fair, do you think that there is no type of pre-chamber being used in F1?

What do you think of this bit of the regulations?
5.1.11 An insert within a PU component is a minimal, non-dismountable part whose function is solely to locally support a function of this component. The total volume of inserts within the component cannot be more than 10% of the total volume of the component.

Doesn't this sort of pre-suppose that there's a pre-chamber? If I'm reading this right it's saying that the pre-chamber is limited to 10% of the CC volume?

There's a lot of questions I probably won't get the answers to.

The fuel injection rule (must be direct injection) leaves no leeway for interpretation. The fuel injection must take place in the space above the piston. I know of no pre-combustion system were fuel and or spark doesn’t take place inside it/were combustion is not started inside it. A pre-combustion chamber of 10 cc or 1 cc is still a pre-combustion chamber. and Godlameroso, how can i think that there is a pre-combustion chamber being used in F1?

How else would the be achieving such combustion efficiency? Again I don't know what combustion tricks they're using. It could be just as you say, a conventional direct injector over the piston crown with a spark plug next to it. Honda for a fact placed their injector on the exhaust side of the head, Mercedes perhaps as well.

What kind of combustion process do you think Ferrari is using? Do you think just bumping up the compression ratio is enough?

I cannot for the life of me think that anybody outside of a “very very selective few” in each of the 4 teams big engine departments will ever know the details of their respective combustion process. Godlameroso, do you remember the past 1.5l turbo era?. the 2 most important thing that is making the difference between than and now are (1) fuel developments, and (2) "TOOLS" in the form of in-cylinder sensors that can control with some reliability abusing all combustion parameters to a very fine and delegate line between a big bang and success.